Should I just wait a while to see what kinda offer they make us TurboHD subscribers or should I go ahead change my programing to get the HD channels not added to the turboHD packages. Either way it sucks, 49.99 to 67.99 is a big difference in my book. At this rate Direct will be close to having a better deal.
Heres what I want to know...
- Thread starter Toddwsu2005
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 24
- Views 3K
I'd wait and see what, if anything, happens in the next couple of months. I suspect, as do others, that Turbo will disappear down the hole next month, so the end result should be known fairly soon.
The buzz is indicating we will hear something in August. I just don't know what we will hear, but if I had to guess I would bet that they are getting rid of TurboHD for new customers.
i don't understand this-having a HD only offering sets dish apart from their competition. The future is HD so why would programmers not want to be in a HD only package-it stands to reason these HD customers are the people the advertisers want the most. Like when they dropped Voom, if Dish gets rid of HD only it will only drive more people to the competition. I like having the tubo because i almost never watch SD and to get the channels i want in HD with direct i would have to subscribe to their 2nd highest highest package
The issue here is that the programmers don't want Dish to sell their channels in HD only. They want you to see all their channels, as that way they get paid more.
It all comes down to money, and that is the reason why the programmers exist, to make money.
It all comes down to money, and that is the reason why the programmers exist, to make money.
The thing that bugs me is that we turbohd folks have clearly not gotten what we signed up for when it comes to adding channels. We have only scene what 3 or 4 new channels out of 11 or so. I just hope what ever they decide is good enough to make staying with them worth while. No company's perfect but I gotta go with whats the better deal for me. I like dish, it's nice to know I dont have to fiddle around to get to where I want to with there tech.
I think you are right, but damn it, I can't understand the logic behind it. Let's use Viacom as an example (my most hated example...):
From what I understand, Viacom gets paid X amount per eyeball, per channel. So they tell Dish, we don't want your Turbo subscribers to get all of the new hd channels, without also getting these other sd channels. Their reasoning being that they will make more money with Turbo subscriber getting all the hd and the sd. But here's the rub; right now, we are not watching MTV, VH1, etc. at all! That means 0 dollars per viewer!! Dish, for their part, is still making the same amount from us customers, but paying less to providers, so if I were them, I wouldn't be in a rush either...
you hit it right on the head-if we are on turbo we are not watching much or ANY SD. So.....we won't be watching you SD channel even if its on our system. We want HD!
Advertising is sold based on the number of viewers who have the potential to see that channel. That's why Fox got into the huge standoff with E* about not being in the lowest programming package, because it reduced the number of subscribers they could report to advertisers.
Do we know that for certain? (I have been speculating this was the case.) It means the programming providers are basically lying to advertisers in order to inflate their bills. It is a mystery why advertisers are so stupid as to accept such an invalid metric (potential rather than actual eyeballs) and just keep throwing money away for nothing. Isn't this what Nielsen ratings are for?
I thought the TurboHD subs also got SD equivalents by default. Or am I wrong and TurboHD is truly JUST the HD?
We get some SD versions but not for all of the channels. Seems to me dish just didn't want to add anymore to the Turbo packs because it really does defeat the purpose. I even watch HD channels on my TV2, the bars havent bothered me yet and the picture quality seems a little better.
I doubt the programmers care whether you have both the SD and HD version of the same channel. It probably counts the same for them. The rub is likely the SD only channels that cannot be placed in an HD only package. Viacom has several of those that they cram into a channel group that is offered on an all or nothing basis. I'm not sure about Fox. The entertainment industry is not known for smart business practices.
Actually, we don't really know that do we? Perhaps the programmers don't want Dish to sell their channels in HD only packages unless Dish agrees to pay a higher premium for those channels -- and Charlie is being too tight. I know one thing, Charlie has no problem charging a premium on channels in an HD only package (the cost per channel is higher in TurboHD packages).
Even if what you say is true and Charlie now realizes he cannot provided the channels he said would make the large price increase that TurboHD got "worth it" -- then why hasn't Charlie lowered the price of the TurboHD packages? That $10/month price increase for TurboHD subs only got them 3 new HD channels while some Classic+HD packages that only saw a $3/month increase got considerably more new HD channels.
Keep in mind the classic subs were already paying $20-25 more to have the SD versions of the channel in the first place. For the classic subs the HD channels are just a new feed of the same channel they were already paying for -- for the Turbo folks any additions are completely brand new channels to the package.
That makes no sense. Why would advertisers care 'x amount of people COULD be watching this program'? They want to know 'Y amount of people WATCH this program'.
No, Fox (or anyone) would want to be in the lowest programming package, because more people would watch them. Let's say there's 100 subscribers on "basic", 100 on "moderate", and 100 on "high". If NETx (like it?) is on the "high" package, only 100 subscribers can possibly see it... and let's say 10 actually watch... that's 10%. However, if NETx is on the basic package, now you've got 300 POSSIBLE viewers. If 30 now watch the show, that's still 10%... advertiser money is still the same.
None of that changes the fact Charlie didn't follow through with his claim about the TurboHD price hike -- and he's done NOTHING to fix that. And furthermore, instead of making the situation "right" it appears he plans to axe the TurboHD packages.
"None of that changes the fact Charlie didn't follow through with his claim about the TurboHD price hike -- and he's done NOTHING to fix that. And furthermore, instead of making the situation "right" it appears he plans to axe the TurboHD packages. "
Exactly, it's hard to want to deal with a company who doesn't play fair.Unfortunately I cant recall or think of a media company that was fair. At least in the television industry.
"Exactly, it's hard to want to deal with a company who doesn't play fair.Unfortunately I cant recall or think of a media company that was fair. At least in the television industry.
