If Dish charges $1.99 per network, how much would your programming cost?

Toggle sidebar
HanoverPretzel said:
You guys realize if they did this, the companies that own television networks would respond by spreading programming out over a zillion networks to force you to subscribe to all of them, right?

Instead of having most of your home team's baseball games on one channel, they'll put twenty games each on eight different channels. Instead of having a 24 hour news network, they'll put news on different channels at different times of day. You like CSI and it's spin-offs? Prepare to have each CSI show be on a different channel. I can see where that kind of system would go, and it might not be pretty. You could wind up paying more for less, and whatever it cost, it'd be a lot less convenient to find the programming you're looking.
Click to expand...

That is exactly what they would NOT do, because the networks already know most of their channels will go dark because of the splintered repetitious programming they have. Forced bundling all this crap is the only way they get to keep all those channels up.
 
$1.99 is not even close to a realistic price the channels would charge if they all went a la carte. They would immediately LOSE access to tens of millions of households (hundreds of millions of potential viewers) and so would receive a lot less in advertising revenue. So, the current $10-$20 per month is far more likely as a whole lot of people will choose NOT to subscribe. And those are before we get into how ESPN and Regional Sports networks are going to bend us over and drill us from the rear for their content. Easily $20+ per month. And don't think it will just be ONE channel. They very well could force a suite of channels upon you. A la carte as many imagine won't happen for many reasons, including the effect of squeezing out smaller niche channels that are targeted to traditionally oppressed ethnic minorities, and some in Washington don't like that, or at least hear it from those minorities. So, both Repubs. and Dems. have their constituencies to look out for against a la carte.

However, a separation of Sports networks and non-sports networks could be economically viable for the networks and would bring down the bills of many who would never watch a sports network, and it is the sports networks that have high costs, not stupid channels like The Hub. But even that is not likely to happen.
 
DishSubLA said:
$1.99 is not even close to a realistic price the channels would charge if they all went a la carte. They would immediately LOSE access to tens of millions of households (hundreds of millions of potential viewers) and so would receive a lot less in advertising revenue. So, the current $10-$20 per month is far more likely as a whole lot of people will choose NOT to subscribe. And those are before we get into how ESPN and Regional Sports networks are going to bend us over and drill us from the rear for their content. Easily $20+ per month. And don't think it will just be ONE channel. They very well could force a suite of channels upon you. A la carte as many imagine won't happen for many reasons, including the effect of squeezing out smaller niche channels that are targeted to traditionally oppressed ethnic minorities, and some in Washington don't like that, or at least hear it from those minorities. So, both Repubs. and Dems. have their constituencies to look out for against a la carte.

However, a separation of Sports networks and non-sports networks could be economically viable for the networks and would bring down the bills of many who would never watch a sports network, and it is the sports networks that have high costs, not stupid channels like The Hub. But even that is not likely to happen.
Click to expand...

First off I agree, I doubt you would ever see a blanket $1.99 per channel offering. What possibly might work would be tiered a la carte. This way the provider can pick what tier they will agree to for a sub to that channel.

But the only way I see the current entertainment players doing this is if they are forced to by customers getting tired of the all or nothing option. When customers flip to the nothing only then will you see movement by broadcasters.

Broadcasting groups right now need bundling of their product, why, because its the only way they can keep some channels on the air. Example. A couple of weeks ago I came across an article about AMC networks. AMC is trying to figure out how to get more viewership to IFC and especially Sundance. They are even considering moving some of the AMC hit shows to IFC and Sundance. They also are considering channel multicast for some hit shows. And one consideration was to even move The Walking Dead to Sundance to boost ratings. That was from what the article said was their last resort option.

So you see why their are disputes, its not just about a sub price, its about carrying what the networks want the retransmission businesses to carry and what tiers their programming is placed.

As for sports pogramming, what a wake up call that would be for them. Then it would be a choice sub, not a forced sub. Their ratings/subs would drop like a rock.

One good thing that would come out of a la carte would be the networks would be forced to provide better quality and quantity of programming or become extinct.
 
Dishman1978 said:
You should be charged to change your batteries if you require a service call to change your batteries, or even have a tech show up to show you that you put your batteries in backwards. I'm just saying.
Click to expand...

I am in the HVAC business. These days customers expect me to drive my truck that gets 10mpg for 20 or more miles for free to change their thermostat batteries or even show them how to use a programmable thermostat when they have the owner's manual in front of them. I don't mind helping but I cannot afford to donut free.
 
The channels I find that I use on dish:

America's top 250:

Encore love
Tmc
MTV
Mtv2
Fuse
Gac
Cmt
Lifetime movies (for mom)
Lifetime
Tv land
Bravo
Oxygen (mom)

24.00 approx

I don't need all those shopping channels, they are free on C band free to air. The religious channels are all free on C band.
 
truckracer said:
I am in the HVAC business. These days customers expect me to drive my truck that gets 10mpg for 20 or more miles for free to change their thermostat batteries or even show them how to use a programmable thermostat when they have the owner's manual in front of them. I don't mind helping but I cannot afford to donut free.
Click to expand...
I understand (and agree) with the majority of your post. But, WTH does that last sentence mean?
 
jimdandyvi said:
You would not get many if any sports channels at $1.99 each unless beer pong qualifies as a sport. The wholesale cost of ESPN is currently $5.00+. ESPN has 100 million paying subscribers. For them to continue paying the leagues for the rights to various events, ESPN would need to charge HBO type prices. Figure $15 - $20 a month for three or four ESPN channels.

Right now the non sports watchers are subsidizing the rate for ESPN and the other sports channels for those of us that do watch.
Click to expand...
So what? Sports channels, or more accurately, the cost of them, is what many complain about. It might be a rude awakening to ESPN and others to see what happens when customers aren't FORCED to take their channels and get to *choose*!
 
Mine would come out a bit cheaper but not by much. I figure ESPN would charge $19.99 for ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPNEWS and ESPN Classic. $1.99 might be a bit conservative on some of the other channels but I would pick:

Destination America
Animal Planet
Discovery
History
Learning Channel
H2
A & E
Universal HD (for both RAW and Smackdown)
Golf Channel

This brings me to $37.90 plus my $7 month DVR fee. I'm currently on Dish America so I wouldn't save much but would get the benefit of some channels that I want that aren't in my current package. At various times through the year, I'd probably have MLB, NFL, NHL and NBA which would drive me a but higher as well.
 
truckracer said:
The channels I find that I use on dish:

America's top 250:

Encore love
Tmc
MTV
Mtv2
Fuse
Gac
Cmt
Lifetime movies (for mom)
Lifetime
Tv land
Bravo
Oxygen (mom)

24.00 approx

I don't need all those shopping channels, they are free on C band free to air. The religious channels are all free on C band.
Click to expand...
I think the religious and shopping channels subsidize our package prices.
 
Lue said:
A dollar and 99 cents is the number I am seeing thrown around for an a la cart pricing structure. Just wondering IF Dish was to ever go this route how many networks would you purchase? Think about this and add it up. It may be cheaper on some people to keep the current pricing model.
Click to expand...

Well, I am almost paying that now. There are about 17 channels in my America's 120 package and then the 4 local channels that I regularly record or watch live. So for me, 21 channels X your $1.99 per a la cart channel price = $41.79. America's 120 package is $49.00. So for me I am paying to much or I need to start watching a few more channels.

Maybe I could start watching HorseRacing TV on channel 404, or the Jewelery Television on channel 227. :)
There are more useless channels to pick from then there are good ones. I doubt a la cart pricing structure will ever really happen.
 
Last edited:
Anyone talking about a hybrid ala carte? A package that consists of pick 10, 20, 30, etc for a fixed price out of the entire non premium channel line up.

That would cover your must haves and the channels that occasionally something of interest is on and eliminate the other 70 to 150 channels you don't want.
 

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

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Share this page

Share this page
Top