If that is a true dialog, then the CSR does not know what he/she is talking about. It has to do with agreeing to carry EI.
MLB TV
- Thread starter shaudods
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 110
- Views 14K
Caller
Q: David
MLB network?
A: We don't carry it because we would have to put it in all of our packages.(we don't want to burden everyone)
Ummm...this is a quote from the most recent "Charlie Chat"...which should be called "Cheap Charlie's Chat"
Q: David
MLB network?
A: We don't carry it because we would have to put it in all of our packages.(we don't want to burden everyone)
Ummm...this is a quote from the most recent "Charlie Chat"...which should be called "Cheap Charlie's Chat"
Last I knew, MLB was not avaliable on UVerse in STL. Also..Ergen's comment about you can watch MLB on the internet disgusts me. What about all of his customers that live in rural America that do not have access to decent high speed internet?? Just yesterday we got a phone bill from Verizon and it had a ton of ad's in it trying to get us to sign up for high speed internet..but if you ever try and ask them when they will upgrade our crappy phone lines(seing as we were the last phone exhange in IL to leave party lines) so that maybe we can talk static free for once they just tell us that there is no money for it and yet they can install fiber-optics everywhere?!? Now to get back on track, Ergen also said that not everyone would want to have a dedicated sports channel on their packages...once again what the HECK?!?!? Anybody ever heard of the NFL Network...personally I could care less about having it but we do beacuse it is in the package and yet he says that about MLB. I think someone's ear peice must not have been working during the Chat.
My sister subscribed to Verizon DSL at her fairly rural location and found it to be so bad that she cancelled it and went with DISH Network broadband. She said DISH is much better, not Road runner speed, but better than DSL and about the same price. They also shut off their landline phone and went with Cell phones. Cell service, but no decent phone line service is kind of hard to believe. Verizon is not really interested in the rural customer.
I don't think this is true. A couple of years ago EI went exclusive to Directv much the same as NFL ST and hence was ripped from DISH. This caused quite a firestorm with cable viewers who didn't want to sign up for directv just to get EI. Politicians actually stepped in and it became available to cable subscribers, however, DISH customers were left out in the cold. Personally I don't think the FCC should allow exclusive content agreements with any media provider. It is not reasonable to expect all people everywhere to switch services just to get access to a broad appeal sports package. It never ceases to amaze me that pols bend over backwards for cable and screw dbs (E* in particular) subscribers whenever they get the chance.
I have emailed my congressman (John Olver D- MA) regarding sat issues and have received replies that my concerns are valid, but not going to happen sorry.
I know that it sounds hard to believe but it is the truth. We have no options for internet by "line" other than dial-up and that is even slower than the normal dial-up most people know. Unfortunately Verizon has our exchange and there is nothing we can do about it. And cell service is even poor around here..of course welcome to rural life in the Midwest. We can only dream of what is available to "rural" residents on the east coast.
Two points above I'd like to correct:
1. MLB was requiring providers to carry the MLB Network in order to get MLB EI, not the other way around. MLB did this to ensure a successful launch of the MLB Network. Charlie could theoretically carry the MLB Channel if he wished. But since DirecTV is now part owner of the channel, I can see how it would pain him greatly to do so. !sadroll
2. The MLB Network is not streamed online, and is not available with MLB.TV.
And BTW Charlie, you might not want to push that "watch TV programming on your computer" too hard, as a growing percentage of people are moving to watching internet content exclusively and dropping pay TV providers such as Dish.
1. MLB was requiring providers to carry the MLB Network in order to get MLB EI, not the other way around. MLB did this to ensure a successful launch of the MLB Network. Charlie could theoretically carry the MLB Channel if he wished. But since DirecTV is now part owner of the channel, I can see how it would pain him greatly to do so. !sadroll
2. The MLB Network is not streamed online, and is not available with MLB.TV.
And BTW Charlie, you might not want to push that "watch TV programming on your computer" too hard, as a growing percentage of people are moving to watching internet content exclusively and dropping pay TV providers such as Dish.
True. And what a cop out by Charlie for Dish's inadequate programming -- watch it on the internet. He might as well have added "Or, if you want MLB in HD, get Directv." Which makes me wonder why we should should even bother with Dish.
Damn it, I want MLB TV. I have been with Dish for a while now and it is killing me not watching the WBC right now. Geez put all the "pro" channels in a package and charge us $5 more per month for these channels and I will order and pay.
MLB TV is the internet package. MLB Network is the television network. They know there is a large interest.
I'm sure they will carry the National Pastime in time. It seems just foolish and un-American not to carry the network, (LOL) but nothing I can do. I hope for next year. ESPN has broadcast a number of the WBC games and covered it well, at least the ones I have been able to catch. I'm with you guys that want MLB Network. In a couple of weeks I'll be tuned to NESN on a regular basis and that will take the sting out of the missing network.
Hang in there. I'm going to. It will come.
You you know what I love most about these MLB Network Threads? The same thing I love about the E* vs. Tivo threads. It allows every fanboy/troll to come forth for judgement.
Let us all have a moment to reflect upon ourselves, and consider our individual contribution to this discussion thread. Gloating, bashing, and marketing does not count as a contribution. ITs counts as "more of the same".
Are some of us guilty?
Let us all have a moment to reflect upon ourselves, and consider our individual contribution to this discussion thread. Gloating, bashing, and marketing does not count as a contribution. ITs counts as "more of the same".
Are some of us guilty?
I believe that Charlie said MLB was requiring the channel be put in the lowest package thereby making it available to everyone. Charlie said he did not want to burden everyone with the cost of the channel. Sounds like he wanted to put it in the 200 or 250 package or in the platinum package so only those that want to pay for it will get it, but MLB said no. Question is do they get more complaints by not carrying it at all or more complaints by putting it in the lowest package and raising everyone's price? He must figure the latter. I personally would love the channel and wouldn't mind paying a bit more for it as long as none of the games they carry are blacked out. If games are blacked out then I would not pay one more cent for it.
I believe that Charlie said that MLB was requiring that the channel be carried in the lowest package. I believe Charlie said that he did not want to burden everyone with the cost of the channel. I suspect that Charlie wanted to put the channel in classic 200 or 250 or in the platinum package so only those that really want the higher packages have to pay for it. I personally wouldn't mind paying a bit extra for the channel as long as none of the games are blacked out. If any of the games are blacked out then I wouldn't pay one extra cent for the channel.
I don't know what that specifically means, but I'm guessing it means you can watch internet video on a TV through the VIP box (the VIP box acting as an internet appliance that will convert the internet video stream to TV format so you can watch it on your HD or SD TV set).
I just use my PC and videocard that has a TV out to feed my HD set with MLB.TV internet package.
How does the MLB.TV internet package look on your TV? When I watched it online last year, it was blurry on my PC at times, I would think it would be worse on my TV.
Just to followup...
Charlie made a comment on the Charlie Chat about watching the internet feed on your ViP receiver.
I got clarification from Dish Network on this and what he meant was that support for internet streaming is a planned function of the upcoming ViP 922 receiver.
Charlie made a comment on the Charlie Chat about watching the internet feed on your ViP receiver.
I got clarification from Dish Network on this and what he meant was that support for internet streaming is a planned function of the upcoming ViP 922 receiver.
"what he meant" was nowhere near what he said. If he doesnt know something , you would think he would say " i dont know", or keep quiet, instead of saying some untruth, that causes more confusion.
There are several channels in the lowest package that I feel "burdened" with because I never watch them. I'm sure everyone can find several channels they are "burdened" with because they don't watch them. That is the nature of a package -- you choose a package because it contains certain channels that you want to watch and there are several you don't care about.
Since we are all "burdened" with unwanted channels, where does Charlie get off with deciding that MLB doesn't merit being a "burden" channel? Somebody needs to remind him that this kind of decision based on his personal opinion is going to lose several subs for Dish. For every sub that has left Dish already over this issue, I bet there are several more that are contemplating leaving at the appropriate time (commitments, etc.). I am seriously thinking of leaving when the hockey season on CI is over...
I'm a Yankees fan, my forum name says it all and I already don't get YES, so I just hope Charlie will set aside his bitterness with Major League Baseball and give us this one channel in the same way he finally relented and gave us the NFL channel. We deserve this. This is so important to so many subs. Come on C, negotiate with MLB!
I can only speculate that different channels cost different amounts per subscriber. Just speculating, I believe that many channels cost little to nothing per sub and go in the bottom package. Probably most channels that most people would balk at paying extra for and the providers know it. I have read that ESPN costs about 2 dollars per sub per month, yet it is in all packages above Dish Family (100 & higher). If MLB wants 2 bucks per sub I could understand Charlie not wanting all 13.5 million subs getting it as it would cost $27 million a month to put the channel on. This would require a rate increase. Again speculating that Charlie doesn't want to raise everyone's rates to add the MLB channel, but would prefer to aim the channel at people that want to pay extra for it, whatever that is. Speculating that is why he used the words "burden everyone with it" or words to that effect. The NHL channel & NBA TV are in AEP and NFL Network is in Classic 200 & above. I suspect he was looking to do the same with MLB, but MLB wouldn't play.
Similar threads
