Maryland getting screwed over by Dish for Big 10 Network
- Thread starter plumerman2003
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 57
- Views 6K
Guess the Big 10 should only have 10 teams.....problem solved.,...
Sad when the Big12 has 10 teams and the Big10 has 12 teams. Perhaps they should switch things up.Guess the Big 10 should only have 10 teams.....problem solved.,...
There might be a valid point about BTN and Maryland. There is no valid reason that NJ should be denied BTN though. NJ doesn't get any RSN's, yet they still pay the same amount as the regions that do. Dish could have easily thrown them a bone by providing BTN.
Although your answers are kind of cute, they really didn't answer my questions. Reading the rest of the thread, I did get the answers and understand the reason. Unless you are privy to the details of the contract between Dish and the provider, or you were present during negotiations, I don't see how you can know that the result is due to Charlie being cheap. Of course, you are entitled to speculate, just like everyone else.
Territories have already been figured out contractually. Not really throwing a bone. Some markets have no rsns some have a couple and some have quite a few. It's the same for locals. Some have more than others. Hell, there is one market that has no NBC. (Not a contract dispute). Yet they all pay the same price because the core pckage is what is paid for. And with that, I will go back to the service agreement that no channel or program is guaranteed at any level, area, or platform. Everyone gets mad, but have no problem signing the paperwork without reading to get their TV hooked up.
its real easy. It seems like Dish is always giving the customer who wants sports the short end of the stick.
This is a good example
The Part time HD RSN is another
Other examples are when Dish wont pony up the money for the extra games that a RSN may acquire. Minnesota was one of them a couple years ago when Dish denied folks 25 Timberwolves games. They did it a few years earlier with the Twins games
In Georgia they do the same thing for the extra Braves games and have for like 3 years now
They had it happen in Dallas, St Louis...and it goes on and on
I love when people say "oh Charlie is looking out for us". The hell he is. He doesnt care if you see the games or not. He's got you as a sub and if you're in a contract you either are screwed or you pay to leave.
And that is part of the reason I'm never signing another TV contract. They are too one sided. The way it's written providers can change anything they want at any time and you just have to deal with it or pay an ETF.
If Michigan or Michigan State games were blocked on Dish and I didn't know that when I signed up I would want to switch immediately when I found out. I wouldn't be able to without paying an ETF.
Again, DISH does this because if they signed all those (and there are more) after contract agreements we would be hit with even higher increases, and I would be paying closer to what I would with Directv including a surcharge for RSN's. There's a reason I pay around $170+ less a year with DISH.
This is why there is competition and there should be. I have a choice, I choose to save that money and in addition get a few channels on DISH not available on Directv that I watch, and pay less fees, others can pay more but get RSN's in HD full time, some markets get more of them and Direct will usually pay the extra money for extra games.
The only thing missing that I feel DISH should do better is make it clear to new subscribers when games are not carried either for College packages or on RSN's if they would be affected.
In that kind of example I think a carrier, in this case DISH should be compelled to let someone out of a contract if it was not made crystal clear at the time the contract was signed. By the same token, it would be impossible for a carrier to guarantee channels will be there for a contract period. If people would be willing to forego the steep discounts as new customer, which really means no contract, then they can leave when they want. Can't have that both ways. The steep discounts means you agree there may be changes to programming. I disagree the contract is one sided. New customers get steep discounts and other free things, or subscribers can upgrade to the newest equipment. Whatever the case the customer is getting something and in return agrees there may be changes during their agreed to contract period. You are not compelled to sign a contract, if you don't take the discounts or buy the new receiver yourself.
It should be safe to assume that if you have big 10 network with Directv and get X number of games, you should be able to get those same number of games if you have big 10 network on Dish.
Why advertise the fact you have the channel when you can't get any games ?
I see no issue for a situation like the YES network where Dish just doesn't carry the channel.
Maryland and New Jersey are not that big states. They already got people pissed off they can't get Yankee games and they don't subscribe to dish to begin with.
Either suck it up and just pay the fee for the games, or don't offer it at all to your subscribers.
dish is a multi billion corporation, they make more profit today than they have in the past. They can afford it.
Why advertise the fact you have the channel when you can't get any games ?
I see no issue for a situation like the YES network where Dish just doesn't carry the channel.
Maryland and New Jersey are not that big states. They already got people pissed off they can't get Yankee games and they don't subscribe to dish to begin with.
Either suck it up and just pay the fee for the games, or don't offer it at all to your subscribers.
dish is a multi billion corporation, they make more profit today than they have in the past. They can afford it.
What in saying is don't advertise or sell the big 10 network in this area.
Sorry if I came off as meaning nationwide
Mochuf ;QUOTE
There might be a valid point about BTN and Maryland. There is no valid reason that NJ should be denied BTN though. NJ doesn't get any RSN's, yet they still pay the same amount as the regions that do. Dish could have easily thrown them a bone by providing BTN. End QUOTE.
NJ has plenty of RSNs, Dish refuses to pay for them.
CHAD
Don't make it sound like RSNs don't exist there and that's the Reason NJ doesn't have any .
MSG, MSG Plus, SNY, YES
That being said atleast if your know your not going to carry the channels, then don't advertise them.
Which dish doesn't in the NY sports aspect.
And to avoid Nasty RSN fees like our Friend Directv loves giving out.
But if you are offered BIG TEN network or yet have to pay extra to get it. Then it damn well better have all the content that every other provider has on its BIG Ten network.
I just find in interesting that so many of yous would rather back Charlie up , then back up a Member here that clearly has a Valid point.
You have the Channel, you live in the Required Territory, No excuse is valid unless the standard blackout rule applies.
The Charlie Blackout is not valid.
Apparently Charlie is not telling Maryland Big Ten Customers they are getting no games.
Seems to me it's another bait tactic.
Last edited:
Here's the thing. Even the channel guide they have listed online shows that only some states get the big 10 included in the AT120 I think, which is fine, but when it lists Big 10 in the multi sports pack nowhere does it say "except Maryland, because you won't be able to watch anything on the big ten network during that time because on your guide it shows Maryland versus "X" and when you try to watch it you get the "it's blacked out" message. " Well then show me any other big 10 game at that time slot. If they know I can't watch it then why put the damn thing on my guide? It's ridiculous, I'm paying extra for the channel that i can't watch when Maryland plays any sport.
Maryland can get other games. Just not their Maryland games. So the channel is not a complete waste. Here is the disclosure on their website about availability though:
"Restrictions may apply to availability. Games subject to local blackout. Games in high definition require HD television and HD receiver; fee may apply to upgrade. Subject to change without notice. © 2015 DISH Network L.L.C. All Rights Reserved"
"Restrictions may apply to availability. Games subject to local blackout. Games in high definition require HD television and HD receiver; fee may apply to upgrade. Subject to change without notice. © 2015 DISH Network L.L.C. All Rights Reserved"
Of course we must give all we can to the College Football cartels (sorry I mean conferences) and all customers must foot the bill.
They they they? You mean the channel that obtained the rights after the fact had their hands out for more money than their agreed contract required.
So should FX charge more to be broadcast to include a new hit show and if the provider doesn't pony up, they can withhold that program?
My bottom line is notably cheaper with Dish than all others. So clearly it can make a difference from customer to customer.
It really stinks. The channel providers can do whatever they want and some want to blame Charlie Ergen for it. Raining today? Blame cheap Charlie.
I came back to Dish specifically because they don't bend over for the sports leagues. I like sports, but I'm just not willing to pay for them. Especially paying for them so others can watch.
Agree, with the cheaper aspect, But that's why I chose them , but just because I choose Dish, Doesn't mean I Worship them, or Charlie and everything they do.
I see many areas of things that could've been improved upon with those Millions and Billions of dollars in lost lawsuits in the past 10 years.
Again, I'm happy with my service, But Dish and Charlie open themselves up for Lawsuits and Bad press when they claim to deliver the same such offerings for less, when in reality they don't.
You do compromise for that Dish Network savings especially when it comes to HD, and Sports.