It sounds like you are not familiar with the history of DBS satellite (even though you can spell British town names and pronounce Spanish stadia names... are you Polish, btw?).
Ten years ago, channels owned by companies that also owned cable systems, used to refuse to sell those channels to Dish, or else at ridiculous prices far higher than they quoted to cable systems much smaller than Dish.
Eventually, Dish had to go to the FCC, where a decision was made that channels had to be made available to all providers, and at equivalent prices.
When Rupert owned DirecTV, the channels dared not use the same tactics, because he also owned channels that their systems needed to be competitive.
Lately, the channels have shifted their tactic to "which package are we in". It's six of one and half a dozen of the other. If the channel is getting 20 cents per subscriber, sure they want to move from the package with 2 million subscribers to the one with 10 million subscribers. Of course, this simply multiplies Dish's cost by five, without providing any benefit to Dish, because almost every viewer interested in the channel is subscribing to the higher package already. (How many AT100 subscribers have ever heard of "La Liga" ?)
People in this Forum tend to feel that if their ice cream cone falls to the ground, then it is Charlie's fault. Yeah, Dish Network is not a charity, but neither are the channels they carry - both are businesses looking to maximize profit.
And again, I repeat, feel free to subscribe to DirecTV - nothing wrong with that - Charlie himself has said on more than one occasion, when asked about NFL Sunday Ticket - "if you want that, subscribe to DirecTV".