People could watch a blank channel and get more honest info than CNN
FOX News Channel/DISH dispute
- Thread starter Bodo Fenrirsson
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 795
- Views 107K
- Status
People could watch a blank channel and get more honest info than CNN
Imo it is the same as the glass half empty or half full, both dish & fox are equally to blame for this outage.
That's exactly right, they both have goals of profit maximization.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This will be spun by some here as "Mean old Dish blocked me from seeing the Fox news feed online". When, in reality, Fox actively chose to remove access to Dish subscribers. CNN used this tactic too. Yet, some here will blame Dish for this, instead of the company that removed Dish from the list of access to watch this. Fox certainly could have kept this access even without a contract. But rather, Fox chose to put the screws to the viewers.
Only, if you feel that it is alright for FOX to try to bring up three Fox sports channels , that are NOT up for RENEWAL , into this same dispute as Fox News and Business channels. To DISH this was a violation of the existing contracts & that would obviously give FOX even more leverage in contract renewals going forward in the future.
To all of you saying there is no real distinction I don't get it. All the cards are with the programmer, not the carrier. Saying it is a "non distinction" is the exact same as saying DISH should just do whatever the programmer wants. DISH has two options in negotiating, do whatever Fox wants after negotiations have not come to a conclusion or refuse and lose the channel. At the point of not agreeing DISH does not (with rare exceptions) then take the program off the air voluntarily. The programmer can give permission to continue to carry it or they take it off, not DISH. It is clearly the programmer making the subscribers suffer at that point, as is their exact intent to put pressure on the carrier.
So according to some, DISH not agreeing to the demands is very wrong, but the programmer not agreeing with what DISH wants is just fine. And meanwhile some of those same people and others rip DISH for increases, increases that still have them less expensive generally than others.
And then just to be clear if reports are correct Fox is holding DISH hostage over existing contracts.
That's called being a Carcass Picker. Good Lord! Trust me, Dish keeps tabs of all your discounts.
Another knucklehead. Yes they could just pay whatever is being asked and then charge me $15 more than they do now like Direct TV would be for me. I agree however unless given a reason people don't need to be loyal. My reason is $180 savings a year and excellent receivers.
I called and got $20 off for 8 months and showtime for 3 months. Their first offer was $5 off for 3 months
I never said it was right or wrong. You're twisting my words. All I said was that I don't see why that distinction is so important to people. The person selling something sets a price. The person buying can chose to pay that price or pass. The person selling would be kind of stupid to provide their product anyways when the buyer chose not to pay for it. Stop paying your Dish bill and see how long it takes Dish to turn off your service. It's the same thing.
Yes Fox pulled the channels but they did it because Dish didn't agree to pay for them. All I'm saying is that this is a two sided negotiation. Fox isn't 100% of the reason the channels were pulled. As much as people here don't want to hear it, Dish shares some of that percentage.
Again, I'm not saying this wasn't the right move. I don't have pay TV and I didn't watch Fox News even when I did have Dish. I just don't understand why it matters so much which side flipped the switch. The negotiating on both sides made that happen.
To say something on the other side of the argument, I agree with those getting discounts if DISH is going to offer them. While the programmers are the most to blame, DISH has to share at least some responsibility and they do need to know there are consequences for not renewing contracts of popular channels. The more people keep the phone lines going the more a message gets said about wanting the channel in any dispute. Judging from posts here the only way I can judge, it seems this dispute has hit a bigger nerve than most disputes with subscribers.
So I'm a knucklehead for not towing the dish company line? Okay, then you're a brain dead minion for waving the pom poms.
DirecTV would be about the same after discounts are over but take into account the $300 Visa card I would get from them plus the 1st year savings I would be way ahead if it wasn't for all dish compensation I'm getting now. Will never apologize for it. Don't understand the loyalty to a company that really doesn't care about the customer. It's all about profits and I'm fine with that but don't expect me to sit on the sidelines when popular channels get pulled.
Interesting...they modified their website and removed Dish...oh well, I'll still survive just fine until the dispute is resolved (as they nearly always are) and Fox News returns and I can resume watching it. In the meantime, I'll get by with local news and maybe Headline News...
It is free if you as an end user want to put an antenna up! But, if you want to retransmit that signal to millions of households you have to pay for it! It's a simple business proposition. If I own the local CBS affiliate and you are going to retransmit it to all of your subscribers and charge them to do it, which DISH/Directv do, you are going to pay me for that right, it's as simple as that.
The most simple answer to that is because unless DISH agrees to pay the programmer then to try and upset the subscribers pulls the channels. DISH can't make that decision, the programmers could keep the channels there still getting paid under the old contract, and is most common then get back whatever increase is finally negotiated. But they choose not to.
- Status
Similar threads
