That's because cable subs get to claim in some areas that they don't have an alternative, such as my area, only Comcast, Dish, or DirecTV. However we satellite subs get told "switch to cable
msg and msg+ wil they give in
- Thread starter dan188
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 150
- Views 15K
Every item you brought up is as much speculation as were my points - except that they are skewed to think that Dish is doing all it can for the common good for it's customers. I am not so naive to think that Dish would not have added more HD channels, or give me a premium move channel for a year (which does nothing if I already subscribe to it) - but i also recognize that my receiver fees have gone up during that span despite Dish clamoring on the line of frozen package rates. But I will agree with you that they ARE saving a lot more money by not concentrating on sports, and therefore you get some more HD, like BBCA maybe - but that's beside the point. My point was that the subscriber did not see a direct benefit from Dish not paying for any NY RSNs and to say that the regular Dish "upgrades" that they need to stay competitive are the driving benefits as well as the cost of doing business (e.g. fuel, etc.) - c'mon now. You really believe that paying for NY RSNs would have stopped innovation and upgrades in Dish? That is certainly what Dish wants everyone to believe.
The Fat Man said:
but you can't get cable In some areas. satelite is the only option for tv in maney areas. my friend wated cable but it would have cost him over 1k cause he wasnt In a serice area. that argument doesn't hold much water
I agree with you. The sad case is that our regulators don't take that into consideration. Most municipalities have a deal with a specific cable company. So they look after that interest. Satellite can set up shop virtually anywhere LOS is available, so satellite companies don't have these deals. I can have Dish and my two neighbors can have DirecTV. However, unless you are in an area with FiOS or U-Verse, all cable customers have to subscribe to the same company. With the situation you mentioned, regulators simply don't care. This is due to low population.
Last edited:
Regarding government regulators and representatives, I was thinking of other things that are low.
I suppose if Dish or Directv had basically no competition in a city with 2 million subscribers; the Government wouid have gotten involved in it. Linsainity realistically brought an end to the Dispute. It wasn't the pressure of the Buffalo Sabres Fans or the Rangers Fans, or the NHL It was the NBA and their Commissioner along with Gov. Cuomo, whom started to push the parties together to make an agreement. Oh, btw, the overpriced unwatched FUSE channel made it's way back on the TWC HD offering too.
Which would keep this deal from being a benchmark for DISH to make a deal with MSG.
Perhaps the price was cut way down on FUSE as part of the deal. TWC held its ground a long time in this dispute, I bet they got a good deal.
No, but TWC has far more subs in the MSG area than Dish has. TWC was felt by MSG, Dish's effect is far less.
Dish put themselves in this situation when they chose not to carry YES. I understand why they didn't but to ignore fans of one of the most profitable sports franchises on earth would cause a lower number of subs than your competition. MSG can hold out longer, as people in NYC with Dish aren't avid sports fans to begin with.
