HBO/Cinemax Takedown

[lparsons21]

Dish is no better than any other provider these days.

They used to offer a good value but what they don’t charge on their packages gets made up in excessive fees.

Just like every other cable/sat provider.

 

[ncted]

Dish is no better than any other provider these days.

They used to offer a good value but what they don’t charge on their packages gets made up in excessive fees.

I guess that is a matter of perspective. My parents on DirecTV pay about the same as I do for 3 TVs.

Dish Hopper & 2 Joeys: $34 (without discount)
DirecTV ASR and 2 Clients: $32 (without discount)

Given how much superior the Hopper is when compared to the DirecTV offerings, I'd say it is worth $2/month, and not excessive. I am not sure what other fees you are referring to. I don't pay a Regional Sports Fee on Dish, like my parents do on DirecTV. I do pay for locals, but I also have the option of not having them, unlike Spectrum and their "Broadcast TV" fee. Speaking of Spectrum, what are their fees for a whole-home DVR with more than 2 tuners and 2 client boxes? It looks like it would be $37.96 for 3 Outlet Fees + the DVR fee, but I don't know if that is a whole-home DVR or not.

Anyway, I guess please explain which Dish fees are onerous in your opinion, because I can't seem to find any real data to support your assertion.

 

[dweber]

Your Dish bill will not be charged for any time without HBO/Cinemax. I applaud Dish for this.


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[rad]

That too. But even if the minimum subscriber thing isn't true, AT&T still has Dish over a monopoly barrel.

How is it a monopoly? It’s not like it’s the only premium movie provider out there. They have a product and they think it’s worth a certain amount of money. You don’t want to pay that price then that’s your decision.

 

[Bruce]

Dish is no better than any other provider these days.

They used to offer a good value but what they don’t charge on their packages gets made up in excessive fees.

Everyone has excessive fees, one of your main business partners (Comcast) is the worst, Broadcast TV Fee (up to $10.00/mo.), Regional Sports Fee (up to $8.00/mo.) , the X1 $10-20 a month and each extra DVR Box ( slave to the X1) another $10 a month.

That is the main reason I have Vue is the fees, if I still had Comcast it would add roughly $60 ( need 5 boxes) in fees alone a month to my bill which is $10 more then I pay for Vue.

 

[dare2be]

How is it a monopoly? It’s not like it’s the only premium movie provider out there. They have a product and they think it’s worth a certain amount of money. You don’t want to pay that price then that’s your decision.

Well, I'm not going to repeat myself.

Saw this coming. ATT can hold HBO over Dish's head as long as they want all while siphoning subscribers from Dish until they bleed to death. The ATT/TW merger should never have happened. More importantly, content distributors should never have been allowed to be content owners due to the inherent conflict of interest/monopoly scenario.

 

[JSheridan]

Here we go, the AT&T fan boys show up to try to defend the indefensible. What a joke.

 

[rad]

Well, I'm not going to repeat myself.

Dish could agree to pay what HBO wants and pass the increase along. Or Dish could eat part of the increase and lower their profits. Either way HBO is not a monopoly. The only way I could see it being a monopoly was if AT&T was the ONLY distributor that carries it.

 

[Bobby]

Dish could agree to pay what HBO wants and pass the increase along. Or Dish could eat part of the increase and lower their profits. Either way HBO is not a monopoly. The only way I could see it being a monopoly was if AT&T was the ONLY distributor that carries it.

HBO is not a monopoly. It is more like AT&T is the monopoly trying to take their product, HBO, away from other providers...

 

[rad]

Here we go, the AT&T fan boys show up to try to defend the indefensible. What a joke.

So HBO is supposed to just let their profits decline so Dish doesn’t have to raise their prices, not. Prices for things go up and if you can’t afford to pay it then you don’t get to buy it. Sorry it’s just capitalism at work.

 

[Tampa8]

........... The only way I could see it being a monopoly was if AT&T was the ONLY distributor that carries it.

Soooo not a monopoly.... yet.

 

[charlesrshell]

Dish could agree to pay what HBO wants and pass the increase along. Or Dish could eat part of the increase and lower their profits. Either way HBO is not a monopoly. The only way I could see it being a monopoly was if AT&T was the ONLY distributor that carries it.

I think DISH could do both.

 

[Bobby]

So HBO is supposed to just let their profits decline so Dish doesn’t have to raise their prices, not. Prices for things go up and if you can’t afford to pay it then you don’t get to buy it. Sorry it’s just capitalism at work.

You aren't seeing the big picture here. AT&T wants Dish, and probably the other providers later, to guarantee sub levels. So, if you aren't interested in HBO you'll have to subsidize those that do want it.

 

[JSheridan]

So HBO is supposed to just let their profits decline so Dish doesn’t have to raise their prices, not. Prices for things go up and if you can’t afford to pay it then you don’t get to buy it. Sorry it’s just capitalism at work.

It's called a monopoly plain and simple when the same company owns the delivery service (DirecTV) and the content provider (HBO). It's so obvious to everybody who doesn't think that AT&T can do no wrong.

 

[dare2be]

Doom & Gloom

Could this be the beginning of the Rapture ?

 

[rad]

It's called a monopoly plain and simple when the same company owns the delivery service (DirecTV) and the content provider (HBO). It's so obvious to everybody who doesn't think that AT&T can do no wrong.

So Comcast is a monopoly since they own a delivery service (Comcast cable) and content provider (USA network SciFi, NBS, etc) using your logic.

 

[dare2be]

So Comcast is a monopoly since they own a delivery service (Comcast cable) and content provider (USA network SciFi, NBS, etc) using your logic.

Technically, yes. The only reason monopolistic actions have not resulted from that merger is that the gov't put conditions on the merger for it to be approved. AT&T's merger with TW had no conditions.

On a smaller scale, there are still problems with Comcast not allowing competitors access to their owned channels (or asking for exorbitant prices), like CSN Philly.

 

[comfortably_numb]

you'll have to subsidize those that do want it.

So... Socialized HBO ?

 

[JSheridan]

So Comcast is a monopoly since they own a delivery service (Comcast cable) and content provider (USA network SciFi, NBS, etc) using your logic.

Comcast hasn't become a monopoly yet because they haven't tried to squeeze out all the providers that carry their channels like AT&T has. This is just the beginning unless AT&T is stopped. I'd love to see the government break up AT&T like they did the Bell system.

 

[rad]

Technically, yes. The only reason monopolistic actions have not resulted from that merger is that the gov't put conditions on the merger for it to be approved. AT&T's merger with TW had no conditions.

Maybe because it's not a monopoly that conditions weren't required. You still want HBO you can sign up for HBO Now. Or you can switch to another provider that still carries it.