Why are you blaming Dish? Dish didn't do this, Sinclair did. Go cry to Sinclair. Maybe if people did that en force, they'd thing about making a dealI'm so glad I'll never be able to watch baseball again and have no other option unless they bring the promised Fioptics to our area.
Sinclair CEO warns Dish: Agree to deal or risk becoming irrelevant
- Thread starter dennispap
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 169
- Views 26K
Probably because Sinclair doesn't have a satellite Dish in my yard and doesn't have a DVR sitting under my TV.
Last edited by a moderator:
That's just ridiculous. So if your dog was chained up in your yard and someone came in and took him, you'd blame the chain?
Better yet, Dish should pay what Sinclair demands so MR_X Can have his baseball games and it's OK because he won't complain when his bill goes up to cover the increase
Agreed MR_X, I do not have another option but satellite because I’m still under contract as I renewed 30 days prior to the dispute starting. We do not have internet access where I live so all the streaming options are useless to us. I sure hope they settle this soon........
Where are you posting this from then? A friend’s house? A library?
From my cell phone that has limited connectivity. I’m going to be honest, this forum has gotten really nasty about snide comments towards others in recent years. I used to come here for a lot of my satellite questions but have noticed lots of nasty, attacking comments that have simply been disrespectful. If you do not have a comment related to the post, please refrain from interjecting your opinion. I simply asked a question, hoping someone had an answer. I don’t need you questioning how I’m making this post. I had considered becoming a contributing member to this site but I opted against it because it’s mostly personal attacks against others rather than meaningful discussions. Thank you.
Really?? I don't see it that way. Are there some snide comments? I suppose but some of them are well deserved, too. Maybe not in your case, although I think it wasn't out of line to ask how you're posting if you don't have internet. It's definitely warranted, IMO, when people are blaming Dish for a provider taking down their stations because they want an exorbitant raise in fees
Yes really! I’m not sure a snide, nasty comment is ever “well deserved”. If you find yourself needing to post something like that, then continue scrolling and keep it to yourself. I’m not sure it’s neither warranted nor helpful to anyone. Thanks!
Over the years I have spent here, my skin has thickened. I have learned offense is not always meant, and can be shrugged off even if intended.
Are you new to message boards?
Let's get this back on topic. People like you and MR_X are upset because of the take down of Regional Sports and incorrectly, you blame Dish. This is not Dish's fault. Dish didn't decide to stop broadcasting those channels. Sinclair decided to block Dish from broadcasting them because they want out-of-line increases on a new contract. Whether it satisfies you or not, Dish is looking out for the customers' best interest by not giving in to these demands. Unless you're cool with large increases in your monthly bill every time a new contract comes up.
If you want to direct your dissatisfaction, do it where it's warranted. Contact Sinclair. That's who's to blame for this. Not Dish.
Nope, are you? I’ve seen Scott post several comments about things such as this though over the years and would hate to see this forum go away because of a few people who find it difficult to comment or post appropriately, that’s all. Anymore questions for me that I can answer for you?
Yeah, you want to re-read that post, since I edited it? And no, I've been a forum user since the BBS days in the mid 90's. My skin has thickened quite nicely
The premise that DISH should just pay whatever or under whatever terms is a bad premise. It's how we got to where we are now.
I agree, this absolutely needs to get back on topic. I’m not blaming either party here, I honestly feel they are both at fault. They are both holding their customers hostage with this dispute. They continue to throw mud at each other and that is getting old. This reminds me of the Dish/Disney dispute from a few years ago.
That is why I asked if anyone knows IF they are still talking to each other or do we need to assume that the days of regional sports channels on Dish being a memory? If that’s the case, I feel like Dish needs to be very transparent with their customers, tell them that, take it off their website, quit telling people that they offer these channels when they currently do not (and have threatened to never carry them again). That seems fair to everyone. If you then choose to change providers to access the channels you want or choose to move to Dish because their service should be cheaper if what they are feeding us is correct, right, then fine!
This is the part I feel very strongly about. Charlie implied in a recent earnings call that Dish would be fine without the RSN's if the RSN owners continue to demand everyone pay for the sports. I am a big sports fan and am now on 2 months without NBC Sports Chicago on Dish (which is ok with how bad the Bulls are right now!) But I would much rather have Dish say "As a company, we have decided to no longer carry RSN's, and as our agreements expire for the remaining RSN's, we will not be renewing them." It lets me know what to expect.
It could be that Charlie is using that tactic as a negotiating tool...
Easy. Easy. I simply asked a question because I was curious. I was not insulting you in any way.
Problem is you have made an assumption that DISH has made that decision. DISH (Charlie) has never said they have decided to no longer carry RSN's so why would they say something that is not true. Proof? They negotiated for a long time, if they were simply not going to carry these particular RSN's there would be no need to negotiate. If a deal they perceived to be good for DISH was arrived at today they would carry the RSN's today.
A different way to say what you did, is DISH appears to be rebuffing simply signing deals that cost more and more money and don't allow DISH flexibility in programming.
You don't think Charlie saying DISH could be fine without RSN's is a negotiating tactic?
The problem with this argument is eventually there will be nothing left to broadcast. Sure Dish is saving people money but there are only 5 channels left.
You're exaggerating. There are at least three channels that I watch and hundreds which I don't.
