Special Retailer Chat Recap - February 14, 2013

[Stargazer]

They are going to have to do something before it's too late. Both will lose subs in the near future. They have to decide whether to take the chance at continuing the way they are or to invest in the subs they have now before they lose them and may never get them back once they switch to cheaper alternatives.


Posted Using The New SatelliteGuys Reader App!

 

[HDRoberts]

My thoughts on this is DISH has the Hardware now to be #1, but they still dont have the programming people want. They need to work on their sports offerings... no reason why a person in Connecticut can't watch the UCONN Huskies, NY Yankees or the METS. Its their missing programming that and public fights about programming that is causing people not to want DISH.

Au contraire, I believe the exact opposite. With a younger generation less interested in sports and wanting to cut the cord, they need to focus on value and convenience. With the Hopper, they almost have convenience down*. What they need is is a value no-sports package. When Dish sits down with Disney (not to mention Comcast, Fox, CBS and other sports channel providers), they need to make them an offer they can't refuse: double the average cost per sub others pay, but in exchange, Dish gets to make RSNs and sports channels a la carte add ons. People who want sports can get it (and pay), people who don't can get the best value in pay TV.

Adding sports may attract some customers, but it will just chase away customers like me. Even if they attract more than they lose, to me, it is not a long term proposition. Sports programming (save maybe football) they way it is now will die in a decade as they set up a feedback loop raising prices, forcing more to unsubscribe, forcing raising prices.

* - That said they could do better, maybe adding more Roku-like ability to get non-Dish internet feeds.

 

[Mochuf]

Like a few mentioned earlier,I feel Dish is firing blanks with this very underwhelming news.The writing is on the wall,DTV only added 200K subs last quarter.Online streaming is becoming a much more viable,cheaper alternative.I also feel they can't squeeze much more out of existing subs.They are going to have to make the programming choices more attractive or watch more and more subs cut the cord.

I thought I read that it was 103,000? Either way, that isn't good for them.

I agree with you 100%. This should be the time that DISH looks into theme packs, you add or don't add to a base pack, like I have already suggested and or possible Welcome pack /Family pack in HD. A lower essential pack in HD is badly needed at DISH. Sports free programming packs are also badly needed. The point where cord cutting is getting closer and closer. The demographics in age alone are pointing at the end of cable /satellite programming packs as they exist today. THe younger generation is not into watching tv and paying for it. They watch over the computer ; Hulu, Netflix, Vudu,etc. Since the older generation is always dieing out every day and the younger is not subscribing ,the point of diminishing returns has arrived. They either need to adapt to survive or die out entirely.

I also agree with both of you. Neither one of my two sons (ages 20 & 18) watch that much content on our big screens, mostly on their computer screens. And when they do watch on a tv, it's usually streaming content or discs. And from what they tell me, these kids are typical for people their age. They would rather spend their money on internet service and smart devices where they can watch whatever they want whenever they want. A tied to the home service doesn't work for them.

While I don't watch anything over my phone; I do watch more content from streaming, either over my tv's or laptop. And I'm 56 years old! The current model needs, at a minimum, an adjustment .

 

[Scherrman]

Au contraire, I believe the exact opposite. With a younger generation less interested in sports and wanting to cut the cord, they need to focus on value and convenience. With the Hopper, they almost have convenience down*. What they need is is a value no-sports package. When Dish sits down with Disney (not to mention Comcast, Fox, CBS and other sports channel providers), they need to make them an offer they can't refuse: double the average cost per sub others pay, but in exchange, Dish gets to make RSNs and sports channels a la carte add ons. People who want sports can get it (and pay), people who don't can get the best value in pay TV.

Adding sports may attract some customers, but it will just chase away customers like me. Even if they attract more than they lose, to me, it is not a long term proposition. Sports programming (save maybe football) they way it is now will die in a decade as they set up a feedback loop raising prices, forcing more to unsubscribe, forcing raising prices.

* - That said they could do better, maybe adding more Roku-like ability to get non-Dish internet feeds.

Since when are younger people less interested in sports? I have never heard this.

 

[Rizon216]

I also agree with both of you. Neither one of my two sons (ages 20 & 18) watch that much content on our big screens, mostly on their computer screens. And when they do watch on a tv, it's usually streaming content or discs. And from what they tell me, these kids are typical for people their age. They would rather spend their money on internet service and smart devices where they can watch whatever they want whenever they want. A tied to the home service doesn't work for them.

While I don't watch anything over my phone; I do watch more content from streaming, either over my tv's or laptop. And I'm 56 years old! The current model needs, at a minimum, an adjustment .

As a guy in his lower 20's, I agree completely with this. I currently subscribe to Dish for convenience, signed up and was installed on 12/30/12. From what my friends tell me, I'm definitely in the minority for people my age. The most of the "younger generation" is doing one of (or a combination of) these things:
- Not subscribing to TV and downloading TV shows via P2P or otherwise illegally
- Not subscribing to TV and downloading/streaming via iTunes or otherwise legally
- Subscribing to a cheaper TV package (for live sports) and streaming/downloading most other shows

I believe that I am one of the few that stream and subscribe to a more expensive TV package (I'm subscribed to AEP, but still in my free premium period - though I plan to keep them beyond that).

The reason I don't mind paying more for Dish is that I can use my home theater system that I bought and set up. My Roku only supports stereo output, so I don't get the surround sound experience that I put together and am proud of. While there are media center programs (such as XBMC) for computers, I find that the Hopper provides a more polished feel and easier-to-use experience than most of those programs. Sure I could go out and buy the Blu-Ray or DVD's of the shows, but many shows I watch I don't enjoy that much (or are the kind of show that doesn't have a real storyline to it, like American Pickers on History) to do so.

All of that said, I do believe the current model is outdated and needs change. I don't watch many sports, and probably would not subscribe to the sports channels if they were offered separately.

 

[HDRoberts]

Since when are younger people less interested in sports? I have never heard this.

If they are so interested, why are they cord cutting and dropping ESPN and RSNs?

 

[david_jr]

You have to believe that streaming if it is the wave of the future (and most likely it is) is not going to stay free or cheap indefinitely. Once the market matures prices will go up and freebies will disappear. Entertainment costs are not going to go down until, not just cord cutting occurs, but until masses of people quit receiving entertainment altogether.

 

[satjay]

I think as well in future all the cable/sat companies will have to change things up and I was hopeing for some big news (though upgrading one of my hoppers to sling with hopper for 100 has me interested) The price of cord cutting with catch up as well, plus for me while I have used aps such as netflix, it's much more easier for me and my family when we want to watch tv to just turn on the hopper and find our shows then search with apps and roku's.

Though I do use the roku dish provided last year

 

[HDRoberts]

You have to believe that streaming if it is the wave of the future (and most likely it is) is not going to stay free or cheap indefinitely. Once the market matures prices will go up and freebies will disappear. Entertainment costs are not going to go down until, not just cord cutting occurs, but until masses of people quit receiving entertainment altogether.

To a degree, but the challenge with the net is, make it pricey and people will pirate.

Also, it will be tough not to have an a la carte model for online content. Sports will be the largest loser.

 

[dare2be]

Sports will be the largest loser.

Not necessarily. MLB, NHL and NBA already have online streaming and device streaming packages. NFL will just need to follow suit, and all of them will just need to offer different tier levels (by team, division, etc) in order to follow in the online ala carte model. ESPN Full Court and College Football Game Plan could do the same.

 

[Stargazer]

if cost rise on streaming service then people will not purchase it anymore and go back to traditional services such as cable and satellite.

Posted Using The New SatelliteGuys Reader App!

 

[dare2be]

if cost rise on streaming service then people will not purchase it anymore and go back to traditional services such as cable and satellite.

Not if the cable/satellite costs have risen accordingly. People will just stream less and less.

 

[Scherrman]

If they are so interested, why are they cord cutting and dropping ESPN and RSNs?

I haven't read anywhere that younger people do not want ESPN or their regional sports channels. Maybe it's different for my area since we do not have any pro sports here. College sports are huge and a lot of people want to be able to watch them.

I'll agree that younger people are cutting the cord but they still want their sports, they just watch it illegally or go to the bar or friends place. I'm not quite 30 yet and sports are very important to me and almost all of my friends.

 

[powerhouse1960]

if cost rise on streaming service then people will not purchase it anymore and go back to traditional services such as cable and satellite.

Posted Using The New SatelliteGuys Reader App!

That’s true and what people fail to realize is the current infrastructure will not handle everyone streaming and who will pay for the upgrades the consumer of course.
It will go like this I pay 9.95 for my video but 150. 00 a month for internet.

 

[stardust3]

I still find it hard to believe that dish puts so much emphasis on ptat, like that's a major selling point for the masses to upgrade or defect their current provider & get a hopper. For me, friends, family & most people I signup, special events & local news are for the most part the only reason to watch local channels. Now I know many here love it & that's great. Outside of this forum most people don't even know what ptat stands for. If dish wants to make the hopper better they need to expand it to include other channels besides locals & truly give retailers something to sell besides the extra monthly fees associated with the hopper.

 

[Teehar]

You have to believe that streaming if it is the wave of the future (and most likely it is) is not going to stay free or cheap indefinitely. Once the market matures prices will go up and freebies will disappear. Entertainment costs are not going to go down until, not just cord cutting occurs, but until masses of people quit receiving entertainment altogether.

I somewhat disagree.The infrastructure is already in place,new providers/alternatives will be coming along all the time.It's not like they have to launch multimillion dollar satellites to offer service.So unlike current satellite and cable providers there will most likely always be competition.

 

[DishSubLA]

somebody @ dish ran the numbers..they found they make more money with fewer customers and no sports than with more customers and plenty of sports

It would certainly mean Dish would LOSE its price advantage (overall, lower than competition--easily lower than my other options), and that is very important to quite a few customers. People would probably just go to DirecTV or cable or expensive FiOS than Dish.

 

[GaryPen]

I agree with you 100%. This should be the time that DISH looks into theme packs, you add or don't add to a base pack, like I have already suggested and or possible Welcome pack /Family pack in HD.

They already do this for their commercial accounts. But, the packs are more like content-provider-parent-company packs than theme packs. Getting all three major news channels requires subbing to three different packs: "News" - NBC Universal (partial), "Variety B" - Turner, and "Variety C" - Fox for a total of $40, plus the required Basic pack for $22. That's $62.

You want Comedy Central? " That's "Entertainment" - Viacom for $12.
BBC America? You'll need "Learning" - A&E/Discovery for $14. (Arguably the only decent value among their "theme" packs.)
HGTV? You'll need the "Women and Gay Men" pack for $14. (That may not be the official name.)

We are up to $92.

Want SyFy, Spike, or TVLand? Then, you'll need the NBC Universal "Variety Pack A" for $14.

$106, and no movie or music channels. Non-premium Movie pack? $12. SiriusXM? $20. Dish CD $30!!!!

Sports is a whore of a different color:
ESPN - $22
RSN packs $14 (If your DMA has a 2nd, specially negotiated RSN, like CSN CA or Sports Time Ohio, another $14!)
Big Ten? $14
Pac 12? $14
General Sports Packs are split into two, so if you want Gold and Tennis, you'll need Sports A and Sports B for $26 total.

Granted, these are commercial prices, so they will be a little higher than residential, especially when it comes to sports and commercial-free music, as they are quite simply taking advantage of the need for these channels in the bar/restaurant and retail businesses. (They are raping Office commercial customers, otoh.) But, the general programming packages are pretty close to what you'll pay for similar residential packs, as the previous commercial packs were priced similarly to residential.

And, the biggest point is that you'll still be stuck with and paying for channels you do not want, as the content providers still get to have their multiple channels of repetitive crap bundled together.

 

[dare2be]

They already do this for their commercial accounts. But, the packs are more like content-provider-parent-company packs than theme packs.

Yeah, the current holding-company-makes-the-rules landscape would presumably only allow significant ala carte choices by channel ownership. "You can offer our channels in a sub-pack but you can't split them up between packs."

 

[Stargazer]

It's streaming prices increase much more than what they are now becoming closer in price to sell satellite and cable providers then their advantage will go away as far as pricing.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using SatelliteGuys