You could get 2 Hoppers and 1 Joey for the same monthly fees and then you have 6 tuners to play with. That doesn't solve your OTA issue but when it is implemented you'd have even more tuners.
You could get 2 Hoppers and 1 Joey for the same monthly fees and then you have 6 tuners to play with. That doesn't solve your OTA issue but when it is implemented you'd have even more tuners.
You could get 2 Hoppers and 1 Joey for the same monthly fees and then you have 6 tuners to play with. That doesn't solve your OTA issue but when it is implemented you'd have even more tuners.
Only if you want to get blasted for it by some.Speculate? On here?
Which, more often than not in this case, is figuratively the same as that which rhymes with speculate.Speculate? On here?
You could get 2 Hoppers and 1 Joey for the same monthly fees and then you have 6 tuners to play with. That doesn't solve your OTA issue but when it is implemented you'd have even more tuners.
Oh, what the heck...There actually is a logical reason why they might not, but there's no need to speculate.
Oh, what the heck...
Considering that a much more expensive 2nd hopper (compared to the cost of a joey) is only being charged a $7 monthly fee (the same fee as a joey), it makes logical and financial sense that they might be trading away a higher receiver fee for the 2nd hopper by requiring at least 2 joeys on the account before a 2nd hopper can be added.
It's logical, financially sound, and is supported by the fact that there are no 2-hopper configurations with less than 2 joeys on the retailer estimate sheet.
Stargazer said:Seems to me like Dish wanted to have a third tuner to save money. The reason I say that is that they will see it as less likely to need to provide another fully functional receiver when they can just provide another Joey and get the same monthly amount.
I have 3 TVs (HD) and I am going to get 2 Hoppers and 1 Joey. I have no doubt that I can get that configuration. Why bash Dish for something you IMAGINE might happen? Paranoia is rampant here.