Distant Network Information

Something Dish, and most Sat. Guys don't seem to understand about qualification and "white areas". I live in NW Montana. Zip codes are large here. The website asks for my zipcode and phone number and based on this, it states I don't qualify. Yet I live in mountains. I cannot get squat OTA due to these mountains. My "locals" come from Missoula over 150 miles away and only come through Dish. It was Dish's decision to make a distant town's stations my "locals" not mine. A different feed is provided [by cable and limited OTA] to my neighbors in the Flathead Valley on the other side of a set of mountains. Dish does not provide this even though this would be my true locals.

My old waivers were based on my address, not zip code. Why are decisions not being made on your exact location and not a general zipcode?

Heck! I cannot even discuss this with anyone. Emails are not answered. Direct is looking better and better.
AMEN. These people are impossible to deal with. They don't return phone calls or emails. In my case my tenant was eligible for nbc but I was not. It is obvious something is wrong in the system. It is the same house/location/physical address. Whatever they want to call it. Yet, you can't get these people to understand and correct the situation. Also, I hate having CBS and ABC from across the country. I want to see the news in my own state. The whole thing stinks. Directv is getting a call from me also. J
 
rjallen said:
The website asks for my zipcode and phone number and based on this, it states I don't qualify. Yet I live in mountains. I cannot get squat OTA due to these mountains. My "locals" come from Missoula over 150 miles away and only come through Dish. It was Dish's decision to make a distant town's stations my "locals" not mine.
janetdee said:
It is the same house/location/physical address. Whatever they want to call it. Yet, you can't get these people to understand and correct the situation.
I will expand on a couple of other posts...

rjallen's problem is that NPS/AAD will not qualify his address for distant networks. Many of us believe there is a problem with the agreement between Dish Network and NPS/AAD. After all, if locals are available to the customer, then distant networks are no longer an option. Additionally, it appears Dish Network did not hand rjallen's information over to NPS/AAD, so of course they have no record of qualification. Technically, if NPS/AAD started a distant network service, all one would need is a qualification. rjallen, you should go here to find out what eligibility you have for distant networks.

janetdee is in the Sherman/Ada market, which is missing a couple of networks. Dish Network had added a couple of Dallas networks to round out the network offerings in the Sherman/Ada locals package. Now that the injunction has taken hold, janetdee is missing those Dallas networks. janetdee can also check on Distant Network Service on the same link provided for rjallen. DirecTV doesn't offer Sherman/Ada locals, so janetdee will not receive any local channels at all. The distant network offering is only for NY or LA channels.

All of this is due to the fact that the Nielsen DMA maps show them to be in a local channel market. It is not Dish Network that assigns customers to a local market; Nielsen Media assigned customers to Designated Markets Areas (DMA's). So Dish Network cannot be blamed for assigning a customer to any given market.
 
<snip>...... Technically, if NPS/AAD started a distant network service, all one would need is a qualification. rjallen, you should go here to find out what eligibility you have for distant networks.<snip>...

This is basically the "rub" for many of us rural area people. For example, I live on a 1.2 acre corner lot and this is how my actual street address qualifies at the "D" site:

Digital (HD) Distant Network Service Network Affiliate Status
ABC WMUR-DT Grade A (strong signal)
CBS WCAX-DT Grade B (moderate signal)
FOX Eligible
NBC WPTZ-DT Grade B (moderate signal)

This is around the corner using the other street:
ABC WMUR-DT Grade A (strong signal)
CBS Eligible
FOX Eligible
NBC Eligible

Note: My rooftop antenna is within 150 feet of either address.

Now in the real world, I get absolutely no signal on my 622 for any of these channels that it says I have a grade A or B signal for. On the other hand I DO get a great signal for my local PBS & NBC digital channels that they don't even list!

I spent over $500 on a rooftop (2 story house at 800 ft asl) antenna system with rotor & amp specifically to try and get some of these channels.

This is why some of us get a little excited over this issue.
 
Keep in mind that the "real world" is the problem. You cannot get a signal on your 622 because it is probable that the HD signal cannot get to you.

If one is in an ANALOG Grade A or Grade B area, one does not qualify for HD. The DirecTV qualification is based upon the analog signals. Until the law changes to allow for the use of digital maps, that is.
 
If you previously had DNS because you were in a white area - that is not a "waiver." Could you provide more detail about which DMA (and your neighbors over the mountain) are in? Did you have DNS prevously because of being outside of Grade B or did the locals actually give you waivers? Do you fall into any of the grandfather categories?

I define "white area" as not being able to receive OTA. When I go to antenna.org it shows I can get one network OTA-[which is not the case]

The neighbors on the other side of the mountain- get a localized feed of Missoula networks. Local news, local commercials and local special events. Same network feed as Missoula otherwise. My point is I don't get the above just get the same programming as Missoula so I really don't get local programming and for the record, I am NOT in Missoula DMA.

Originally, the easiest way to get DNS was to ask for waivers which I got and the local stations say they will gladly sign-off again. I was grandfathered when the locals were provided by DISH. Please note Direct does not provide a local feed here so I would be able to get DNS from them.
 
I got the same thing. Fortunately I just "moved" to NY. Now the networks even have HD channels that would be a long way off at my "previous" address.


How did you handle the phone connection issue? I'm thinking about "moving" to NY from Kansas. Obviously not the same area code. My locals suck. Don't need them - have basic cable. Also have an RV, so no locals on the road. I'm thinking that with a NY address I would get the NY stations (Conus Feed). Have separate receivers. That way I would have the NY locals at my home and on the road with my RV for the network feeds. Just concerned with the telephone issue? I have an address in Katonah (10536) that I can use. Does anyone see any flaws in this plan? Thanks,

Stan
 
How about using your cell phone?

I never hook my receiver up to my phone cord. You could even get a toll freee number from the phone company. A lot of college kids were using them pre cell phone era. Of course you pay for the incoming call. God forbid dishnetwork sells your information. You could end up with a high bill.

ETA: I think I may have to move too....
 
I define "white area" as not being able to receive OTA. When I go to antenna.org it shows I can get one network OTA-[which is not the case]

The neighbors on the other side of the mountain- get a localized feed of Missoula networks. Local news, local commercials and local special events. Same network feed as Missoula otherwise. My point is I don't get the above just get the same programming as Missoula so I really don't get local programming and for the record, I am NOT in Missoula DMA.

Originally, the easiest way to get DNS was to ask for waivers which I got and the local stations say they will gladly sign-off again. I was grandfathered when the locals were provided by DISH. Please note Direct does not provide a local feed here so I would be able to get DNS from them.

1. What DMA are you in?
2. Does E* carry that DMA's locals? If yes, subscribe. If no, continue.
3. Subscribe to D* and get DNS; switch to locals when available.

It seems simple enough. What am I missing and what does Missoula have to do with any of this?
 
How did you handle the phone connection issue? I'm thinking about "moving" to NY from Kansas. Does anyone see any flaws in this plan? Thanks,

Stan

Yes. The flaw is that you will be "lying" in order to get something that you are not legally entitled to.
 
Yes. The flaw is that you will be "lying" in order to get something that you are not legally entitled to.

Moral issues aside, if your recvr cals in from the phone numebr on the bill no problems. I have not heard of any one being caught moving by the diffrent area code. Most people just leave the recvrs unplugged.
 
Yes. The flaw is that you will be "lying" in order to get something that you are not legally entitled to.

That's true in a "Black & White" world. Unfortunately, things are rarely that way. There are always "Grey" areas. It's who ever has the most political clout that seems to get "their" way. Right, wrong, fair, or unfair. that's the way it is. One of America's strengths is that we find ways to make it work. What you say is a BIG consideration, but it seems we are foreced to make "creative" solutions because of the arbitrary and rediculous rules, judges intrepretaions, and stupid laws. I had an RV waiver before December 1st, but no matter how logical it seems to allow for a RV waiver, there are no provisions for that now. The NPS thing is still up in the air and I am waiting for them to process my waiver, again. Their appears to possible "legal" and quality issues there too.

It looks like the only practical way for an RV owner to get network feeds of any kind is to "move" to an area where the "locals" are on a conus feed instead of a spot beam. The government recognizes that a family can own two homes and one of them can be a "RV". Doesn't it seem the fair and right thing to do is to allow for a "conus" feed locals for RV owners? It's extremely important that this be allowed for those thousands of RV owners who live in their RVs full time.

I have written my representative and two senators about this issue, but know the politial process is a slow one and does not always result in the right and fair course of action.

I only bring this to your attention for consideration that things are not always as clear cut as they might seem from your reply. Still your opinion has merit.

Aside from the "legal" issue your bring up, what are the "practical considerations"? I'm just trying to assess all options. No decision has been made.
 
Yes. The flaw is that you will be "lying" in order to get something that you are not legally entitled to.[/QUOTE

Here is another moral dilemna. About 1/3 of Americans have two residences and this % is growing every year. Many are retirees who go south for the winter. So for 1/2 the year they might live in a DMA that has big city locals in both SD and HD. The other 1/2 year they could live in an area that gets neither. So for years they have been honest and report their moves. But that was prior to "THE INJUNCTION" and they had distants. Now a judge, in a state with many such retirees, tells them they cannot have distants anymore. So they tell E* they don't go to the non served area anymore. Is this right? Probably, not. What is worst it is absolutely dumb of our elected officials to allow such a scenerio. They have not set rules that affect 1/3 of their electorate. Remember the Constitution was to protect people equally, no matter where they lived. These don't.

I know this for a fact. I am one of these Americans. So I now elect to always be in the large city area. Fortunately, the northern city is still conus for both SD and HD. So I get them in the southern city. I still believe since I have residencies in both areas, I should be allowed to see both areas locals all the time. 1/3 of Americans should also be allowed to do the same.
 
Well folks, it finally has happened.

"I waz sitting warwey quiatly waitin' for a wabbit to shoot", and I got a call from AllAmerican and the sweet little gal asked if I was still interested in distant networks. Guess several people have decided to move to DirecTV instead of waiting for AllAmerican to show up to the party and had canceled. I told her yes and she told me that she had my RV waiver and would have 8 new channels within 24 hours. They were on my guide and available several hours later. Needless to say, I was pleasantly surprised. I really never thought they would come through........I asked if they were concerned about the law suit against them and she said "no".

Now we will see how long I get to keep them..........:D
 
Well folks, it finally has happened.

"I waz sitting warwey quiatly waitin' for a wabbit to shoot", and I got a call from AllAmerican and the sweet little gal asked if I was still interested in distant networks. Guess several people have decided to move to DirecTV instead of waiting for AllAmerican to show up to the party and had canceled. I told her yes and she told me that she had my RV waiver and would have 8 new channels within 24 hours. They were on my guide and available several hours later. Needless to say, I was pleasantly surprised. I really never thought they would come through........I asked if they were concerned about the law suit against them and she said "no".

Now we will see how long I get to keep them..........:D

When did you fax in the request?

Mitch
 
I will expand on a couple of other posts...

rjallen's problem is that NPS/AAD will not qualify his address for distant networks. Many of us believe there is a problem with the agreement between Dish Network and NPS/AAD. After all, if locals are available to the customer, then distant networks are no longer an option. Additionally, it appears Dish Network did not hand rjallen's information over to NPS/AAD, so of course they have no record of qualification. Technically, if NPS/AAD started a distant network service, all one would need is a qualification. rjallen, you should go here to find out what eligibility you have for distant networks.

janetdee is in the Sherman/Ada market, which is missing a couple of networks. Dish Network had added a couple of Dallas networks to round out the network offerings in the Sherman/Ada locals package. Now that the injunction has taken hold, janetdee is missing those Dallas networks. janetdee can also check on Distant Network Service on the same link provided for rjallen. DirecTV doesn't offer Sherman/Ada locals, so janetdee will not receive any local channels at all. The distant network offering is only for NY or LA channels.

All of this is due to the fact that the Nielsen DMA maps show them to be in a local channel market. It is not Dish Network that assigns customers to a local market; Nielsen Media assigned customers to Designated Markets Areas (DMA's). So Dish Network cannot be blamed for assigning a customer to any given market.
Hi, I checked the link for directv and it says I can get the locals and need a waiver for CBS. Just to make things more complicated. CBS not NBC. So something is strange all around with figuring out who gets what channels.....Any way, No one is addressing my real problems which is than they are giving my tenant the channel (who obviously lives in the same house, same service location, same area code and same dish) and will not give it to me. Some one just emailed me asking for a utility bill with my address and my tenants info. We'll see what comes of that.....J
 
One of America's strengths is that we find ways to make it work. What you say is a BIG consideration, but it seems we are foreced to make "creative" solutions because of the arbitrary and rediculous rules, judges intrepretaions, and stupid laws."

I echoed this same sentiment in another post. Prohibition would be an example of this.
It is definately wrong to move - though not illegal for the subscriber to to. It is against your contract to have a receiver in another location than the address given to Dish.

What puzzles me is the way the industry has decided to enforce their DMA rules. I say this because even they will say it is a matter of money. The advertising lost to locals would put the locals out of business. (Arbitron ratings - if you are watching WNBC and not your local NBC those advertising dollars are lost) Fair enough. Then why not allow one to get distants and pay a fee that goes to the local station? Most people are still going to watch at the least the local news, and in all probabilty most of the network shows on their locals. But for time shifting, or getting home too late to watch a show you forgot about, having a later time to watch is worth the cost to some. It seems something along these lines could easily be worked out. In today's technology world, the industry cannot stop all the new ways to get programming, so why not work on making it possible while still getting revenue? NAB, wake up.
 
A la carte programming

All of this fuss about who gets what channels would be eliminated if the satellite industry would go to a la carte programming, where for so much per channel, you could pick what comes your way. The FCC has already put the satellite programmers on notice that they favor it, and it would likely save consumers money. After all, how many channels do you actually watch? 15? 20? 30? Of course, the satellite providers will fight it tooth-and-nail, claiming it is not technically feasible (not true) and will result in higher subscriber costs (if they can get away with it).

Canadian satellite providers are a lot closer to such programming, with over a half dozen theme packs that can be added to their basic offering. Then, you can add certain individual channels a la carte (including East and West Coast US and Canadian network HDs) to tailor a package that is right for you. If they can do it, D* and E* can also.

They have also taken care of local ads on network programming with simultaneous substitution (simsub). When a network program is carried on a distant channel, the satellite provider automatically switches in the subscriber's local station, and of course its ads during the show. Cablecos used to do this all the time and many still do.

Going to a la carte will be a political football, with the FCC tugging one way (along with most subscribers) and the satellite providers vehemently opposed.
 
I live in Cancun Mexico and have enjoyed the distant channels since we moved here. Today of course they quit and I can't get my local channels because the satellite guy says we (everybody that lives in Cancun and has Dish) cannot reach the Western SAT # 110.
Is this true?
Can't I just get some more elevation or something else?
Thanx,
JG
 
Last edited:
janetdee: Any way, No one is addressing my real problems which is than they are giving my tenant the channel (who obviously lives in the same house, same service location, same area code and same dish) and will not give it to me. Some one just emailed me asking for a utility bill with my address and my tenants info. We'll see what comes of that.....J
Maybe it's a mistake that your tenant has more than allowed since people and/or systems do make mistakes. But if you feel the morale thing to do is call and report your tenant and have his/her services cut, go ahead.:D

carl033: All of this fuss about who gets what channels would be eliminated if the satellite industry would go to a la carte programming, where for so much per channel, you could pick what comes your way. The FCC has already put the satellite programmers on notice that they favor it, and it would likely save consumers money.
The FCC recommends a la carte, but that's not for retransmission of local broadcasts.

I live in Cancun Mexico and have enjoyed the distant channels since we moved here. Today of course they quit and I can't get my local channels because the satellite guy says we (everybody that lives in Cancun and has Dish) cannot reach the Western SAT # 110.
Is this true?
Can't I just get some more elevation or something else?
Thanx,
JG
Guess you must have a service address somewhere in the upper 50.:D To get enough elevation from Cancun, you will probably have to go up a couple of thousand miles, and possibly over some, to try and get in the line of transmission from the satellite to the point it is transmitting to for most of the locals.

For more info, scroll down the below link until you get to "Larger and more detailed maps of E*10 spot beams". The first one will give you the various foot prints of the spotbeams on the 110 satellite. Then they have additional links for transponders.
http://www.dbstalk.com/ekb/satmaps.htm
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Top