Nexstar Media Group forces blackout of nearly 5.4 million DISH customers

[Howard Simmons]

No Nexstar stations I know of in Detroit, but thank goodness I get all of my locals OTA. This ongoing crap is utter nonsense.

You're lucky.

 

[Nominal]

 

[Ypsiguy]

You're lucky.

Yeah I am. After I delete the religious and shopping channels, I have 27 channels from the Detroit DMA and about 5 from the Toledo DMA.

I run the Detroit DMA channels through the house like a small MATV system.

 

[PortlandChris]

Is that really what Dish is doing, though? How many years has it been since Dish split out the locals, and yet there has only been one price increase to the Locals package in all that time? (Going from $10 to now $12 per month.) How many disputes, and how many price increases to local carriage fees even without a dispute, have occurred since then? Also, why is the cost of the Locals package exactly the same, no matter where you live? Certainly some markets have much more expensive locals than others. (Based on the number of channels carried, if for no other reason.) So why isn't that price difference reflected on our bills with regional pricing? Oh right, you already answered all of these questions:

Why - well for the best answers to why, you should really ask a member of DISH's senior management. I can't explain their position.

Yeah, its $12 across the board, but keep in mind that leaving it at $12 is simple. Can you imagine a different rate for all 210 DMAs? Administratively it would be impossible to work out.

 

[navychop]

...Hopper is still the best in the business.

Better not let Claude hear you say that!

 

[pattykay]

Better not let Claude hear you say that!

I thought Claude was on vacation.

 

[pattykay]

Why - well for the best answers to why, you should really ask a member of DISH's senior management. I can't explain their position.

Yeah, its $12 across the board, but keep in mind that leaving it at $12 is simple. Can you imagine a different rate for all 210 DMAs? Administratively it would be impossible to work out.

Yes, I can imagine that. I can even imagine Dish actually carrying Significantly Viewed stations, and charging different rates in each portion of each market, based on which out-of-market locals are available. It is really not that hard. Dish's programming authorization system can already handle having a different code for each local market and tying that to a list of zip codes, so that subscribers in each zip code receive the correct local channels for their area. Each local package is a completely separate programming package in Dish's system. So, it would not be that hard to have the billing system charge a different rate for each local package. The subscriber would be billed the rate for whichever local package they are actually receiving, just like any other programming package.

I have been saying that the different local packages should have different rates, ever since must-carry first went into effect. It seems fundamentally unfair that subscribers in large market A with over 20 channels in their local package pay one rate, while subscribers in small market B (which can barely manage to keep four channels in their package) also have to pay that exact same rate. I was outraged at this fact even when locals were still only $5 per month. With the cost of locals skyrocketing, the disparity must be even greater now. How much of the cost of the large, expensive markets are being subsidized by locals subscribers in smaller markets who are being overcharged?

I do not expect any actual answers from you, nor from anyone else here. All of my questions are purely rhetorical.

 

[PortlandChris]

Yes, I can imagine that. I can even imagine Dish actually carrying Significantly Viewed stations, and charging different rates in each portion of each market, based on which out-of-market locals are available. It is really not that hard. Dish's programming authorization system can already handle having a different code for each local market and tying that to a list of zip codes, so that subscribers in each zip code receive the correct local channels for their area. Each local package is a completely separate programming package in Dish's system. So, it would not be that hard to have the billing system charge a different rate for each local package. The subscriber would be billed the rate for whichever local package they are actually receiving, just like any other programming package.

I have been saying that the different local packages should have different rates, ever since must-carry first went into effect. It seems fundamentally unfair that subscribers in large market A with over 20 channels in their local package pay one rate, while subscribers in small market B (which can barely manage to keep four channels in their package) also have to pay that exact same rate. I was outraged at this fact even when locals were still only $5 per month. With the cost of locals skyrocketing, the disparity must be even greater now. How much of the cost of the large, expensive markets are being subsidized by locals subscribers in smaller markets who are being overcharged?

I do not expect any actual answers from you, nor from anyone else here. All of my questions are purely rhetorical.

210 rates, with rates changing frequently is just way too much to handle in an effective manner. National advertising campaigns would get complex.

Part of it is probably DISH wants people to drop locals, but does not want to show locals costing more because when people cancel locals the net take will be much more.

The answer to this is each time there is new service or a service call to auto install an antenna. Make any new Hopper handle more than 2 OTA tuners, Take dependency off of locals. People in rural areas may have issues, and they can subscribe to the inflated locals. But in town metro markets should all get an antenna.

Today lots of people lost NFL football. This no doubt will be a painful day for Nexstar phone systems and DISH phone systems.

 

[Ypsiguy]

If the OTA stations would be more flexible, they could make more money. If they would change the law, I would buy other DMAs like Portland, Seattle or SF.

 

[PortlandChris]

If the OTA stations would be more flexible, they could make more money. If they would change the law, I would buy other DMAs like Portland, Seattle or SF.

And then small town stations would cease to exist. Congress and the taxpaying public has decided that's not what we're going to do.

 

[odbrv]

210 rates, with rates changing frequently is just way too much to handle in an effective manner. National advertising campaigns would get complex.

Part of it is probably DISH wants people to drop locals, but does not want to show locals costing more because when people cancel locals the net take will be much more.

The answer to this is each time there is new service or a service call to auto install an antenna. Make any new Hopper handle more than 2 OTA tuners, Take dependency off of locals. People in rural areas may have issues, and they can subscribe to the inflated locals. But in town metro markets should all get an antenna.

Today lots of people lost NFL football. This no doubt will be a painful day for Nexstar phone systems and DISH phone systems.

All billing is done by computers and having multiple rates is no big deal. It is done all the time in freight shipping rates to different locals plus thousands of other applications using variable rates. Dish knows the cost per station and what stations a customer has. The rest is math.

 

[dishdude]

I suspect the pricing between markets isn't that great.

 

[pattykay]

210 rates, with rates changing frequently is just way too much to handle in an effective manner. National advertising campaigns would get complex.
...

In that case, Dish could advertise the bare minimum price for locals (the cheapest market's price) nationwide, with an asterisk that additional local surcharges may apply. Itemize the additional cost on each subscriber's bill as a surcharge. This would be no different than the regional sports surcharges, or the states where Dish tacks a surcharge onto the bill to make up for Dish's expense of paying taxes to do business in that state. Such a billing system would make it difficult for Dish to nationally advertise how much you would save by dropping locals, though.

Part of it is probably DISH wants people to drop locals, but does not want to show locals costing more because when people cancel locals the net take will be much more.

This is probably also why Dish does not advertise their little-known Locals Only package, that allows you to get the locals without subscribing to any other basic package. Dish charges around $30 per month for that package. (Yes, you read that right.) So, Dish does not want the broadcasters seeing that and saying, "Hey, if you are charging that much for a package that only includes our programming, then we want our share of that money!"

 

[Joe h]

Usually the risk of losing college or nfl football games forces dish to just accept a zero hour deal. But if 70% of their customer base losing at least one channel didn’t get dish to blink today, I have a feeling this one is going months, and may even be the signal that locals are a thing of the past, similar to rsns, on dish.

 

[mwdxer1]

Why - well for the best answers to why, you should really ask a member of DISH's senior management. I can't explain their position.

Yeah, its $12 across the board, but keep in mind that leaving it at $12 is simple. Can you imagine a different rate for all 210 DMAs? Administratively it would be impossible to work out.

It is leaving it simple, but unless Dish want to continue with disputes, there is only one way to solve it if people are going to keep their locals, is to raise the price on the local packs, so the people that want them can still pony up the money to get them. If you don't, then don't pay for them. One thing nice about Dish is people can buy the packages with or without locals. If the locals get too expensive, then the subscriber can decide, not Dish. Then if most don't buy locals, they go away. There has to be a way to fight back and to make sure the corporations know, we are tired of this and won't take it any longer. You know a polite way of saying a line from "Network".
It would be interesting to take a poll to find out if Dish raised the price of the locals package, how many would jump ship? Some cable companies are charging $18 a month for locals. I guess a lot of people pay it. It is reality in this day that prices continue to go up. Spectrum goes up $5 a month for internet this month. Do I like it, no, but there is nothing else available here, no DSL, just Spectrum, satellite internet, or cel phone. The price I will be paying $74 a month for better than 100 down is not all that bad here.

 

[HobbyTalk]

It's not just Dish

Hulu Could Lose Some Sinclair Owned Locals | Cord Cutters News

Hulu is next in the line of cable providers and streaming services to lose locals due to disputes with broadcasters. Some viewers started receiving scrolling on-screen notices over the weekend, letting them know that their CBS station could be removed from Hulu. It looks like this is only...

www.cordcuttersnews.com

 

[PortlandChris]

All billing is done by computers and having multiple rates is no big deal. It is done all the time in freight shipping rates to different locals plus thousands of other applications using variable rates. Dish knows the cost per station and what stations a customer has. The rest is math.

Yeah, if programming is there to handle it - rates change frequently. When you change rates consumer protection laws require notice. It's just another thing, and I suspect rates are not much different for most markets.

But by all means tell DISH how to run its operation. I am sure they'll listen to you.

 

[PortlandChris]

It is leaving it simple, but unless Dish want to continue with disputes, there is only one way to solve it if people are going to keep their locals, is to raise the price on the local packs, so the people that want them can still pony up the money to get them. If you don't, then don't pay for them. One thing nice about Dish is people can buy the packages with or without locals. If the locals get too expensive, then the subscriber can decide, not Dish. Then if most don't buy locals, they go away. There has to be a way to fight back and to make sure the corporations know, we are tired of this and won't take it any longer. You know a polite way of saying a line from "Network".
It would be interesting to take a poll to find out if Dish raised the price of the locals package, how many would jump ship? Some cable companies are charging $18 a month for locals. I guess a lot of people pay it. It is reality in this day that prices continue to go up. Spectrum goes up $5 a month for internet this month. Do I like it, no, but there is nothing else available here, no DSL, just Spectrum, satellite internet, or cel phone. The price I will be paying $74 a month for better than 100 down is not all that bad here.

Sounds like ever provider will have some problem with locals before too long. Might just be an all out war going on.

Streaming is not a long term viable option with bandwidth caps for households with multiple TVs. The bandwidth cap will chew through.

 

[pattykay]

Yeah, if programming is there to handle it - rates change frequently. When you change rates consumer protection laws require notice. It's just another thing, and I suspect rates are not much different for most markets.

There is no need for the rate that Dish charges customers to change frequently, though. Dish could keep making the price adjustments once per year, in January, just like they do with all of the other packages, anticipating any expected rate increases that may or will happen in the coming year. Any disparity between the rate being charged, and the actual rate that Dish is paying, can be corrected at the time of the next regularly-scheduled price change. Dish could send out a notice with a link to a website, where customers could use a zip code look up tool to find out the exact amount of their new locals surcharge. Again, this is no different than what Directv does with their RSN fees, and what Dish started doing with the RSN fees this year.

But by all means tell DISH how to run its operation. I am sure they'll listen to you.

Hey, that is pretty much all we do on this site, especially in these dispute threads.

 

[PortlandChris]

There is no need for the rate that Dish charges customers to change frequently, though. Dish could keep making the price adjustments once per year, in January, just like they do with all of the other packages, anticipating any expected rate increases that may or will happen in the coming year. Any disparity between the rate being charged, and the actual rate that Dish is paying, can be corrected at the time of the next regularly-scheduled price change. Dish could send out a notice with a link to a website, where customers could use a zip code look up tool to find out the exact amount of their new locals surcharge. Again, this is no different than what Directv does with their RSN fees, and what Dish started doing with the RSN fees this year.


Hey, that is pretty much all we do on this site, especially in these dispute threads.

Anticipate charges and do it once a year? Most markets have at least 4 locals. Many have 2-3 independents as well. Potentially 7 channels with all revolving terms. I can't see any good coming out of this. WIll need a staff to just communicate to the CSRs what changes daily.

I don't see it being a net positive. I do see providers loosing more and more channels this year. Maybe pushing it in hope Congress acts? Not sure.