I wonder what women think of this move I bet that they will miss it the most.
I wish they would get rid ESPN that sucker cost tons I here
I wish they would get rid ESPN that sucker cost tons I here
boogerbear said:How much do you think Lifetime will lose in ad revenue, without 10 million(I know it is up to 12, but not sure how many of us get Lifetime) possible viewers?
Don't they have a lot more to lose than Dish?
Chris Walker said:Absolutely, they have lost about 1/6th of their viewing audience and LMN has probably lost 1/4. Lifetime wouldn't be pressuring Dish so hard with the "stop discriminating against women" if they weren't hurting badly financially due to this. If Dish was hurting financially over this, LMN and Lifetime would have been back a day after they were shut off.
boogerbear said:I wonder if Oxygen sent Lifetime a thank you note. I really don't believe that we would have ever had Oxygen on Dish without this disagreement.
twinrocks said:Thank you for pointing that out! Dish lost several channels, and have replaced them with either nothing, or lower quality channels. OLN was lost, Reality was lost, and now Lifetime and LMN.
The thing is we don't KNOW the real facts and negotiations, we can only guess. I don't believe a word either side is telling us. All I know is I pay the same, get less, and have no imput.
TNGTony said:Stargazer
Just to put things in perspective:
Dish Network has over 2200 channels in the system. 7 (2 international, 2 locals and 3 "basic) have been removed in the last 12 months. 7 English and 3 Spanish basic and over 150 other channels ave been added in the same time frame.
See ya,
Tony
dkellumw said:I used Lifetime's web site to do the same thing. That was fun. Changing their standard letter to congratulate Charlie.
Cleverly put, but wrong . . . Lifetime wins if they can successfully extort Dish into paying a ridiculously huge price increase. They were betting on a popular Dish customer outcry and political backlash to be successful, and they guessed wrong. The few posts I've see here which try to suggest Dish is as fault have never attempted to justify a 175% rate increase over three years. Your argument, tujucrue, might work some if you could address that one. By the way, doesn't Lifetime sell commercial time too? Why can't the just raise their rates for commercials? You die hard Lifetime fans might not like the answer to that one if you ponder it a bit.tujucrue said:Think about it this way, it is in Lifetimes favor to negotiate a contract with Dish. It's also in Dish's favor not to have to pay for Lifetime at all. So who wins? Not Lifetime. Not the Customer. DISH WINS! Doesn't any one find it peculiar that Lifetime want's to continue negotiations and dish dismissed them?
bgilga said:If I am not mistaken, I have these channels and pay less per month than a Dish subscriber, now that is nuts.
OoTLink said:I think it's great. The prices of the same thing (or worse product) can't keep going up forever. Inflation or not, it's just not right.
Ultimately I don't think we should keep paying more for channels that become lame ducks. If they're charging more and giving less "fresh" content, why should we have to pay for them? That's not to say a channel should be dumping all their re-runs in exchange for fresh stuff, but they should be striving to have just as much new GREAT stuff as they have old GREAT stuff that made them popular in the first place.
For some reason Lifetime comes out to me as a lame duck channel, I'd love to be proven wrong but when in defense of rate increases, they brought out their "guns" -- women's activists groups and deals with cable companies. Why couldn't they try to come up with a reason that their rate increase was worth it?
Was it? Lifetime doesn't seem to say so. Their tactics sounded a little more like blackmail and extortion, not just to E* but to us. Hey lifetime, why don't you tell us why your channel is suddenly worth more than it was last year?
Do I expect more channels to leave E*? Maybe, it really depends. If it's more channels like Lifetime that back themselves up with brute force rather than good reasons, why not?
If say, ESPN had bunches of great quality alternatives out there, and they demanded a rate hike but then when E* questioned it, they went brute force and said they'd raise hell, why keep em? If some other broadcast company could do just as good a job for less? Bring em on!
bgilga said:I think Charlie is as fault here. Lifetime was able to reach agreements with everyone else except Dish. I have Directv and I get the Lifetime channels, I don't watch them, but I get them. What I do watch is hockey on OLN. I really enjoy OLN's NHL in HD. Dish doesn't have OLN anymore. Why? Charlie would not pay. Directv does. OLN is owned by Comcast. Is there a bigger blood feud in TV out there worse than Directv vs Comcast. Comcast-Phila., MASN, NFL ST. They have been brawling about these chanels for years, but they can negotiate OLN on Directv, but Dish can't. If I am not mistaken, I have these channels and pay less per month than a Dish subscriber, now that is nuts.