The OFFICIAL DISH / HBO Thread

[Cubs1]

We did complain to hbo and att they never responded to us and dish they say still negotiating and I don’t know what’s going on and hbo suppose to respond any consumer I don’t know if they ignore us or what?? I did email to them for many time never responded to me nothing ..


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[SandFarmer]

I have it as an add-on Channel to AmazonPrime Video and have an HBONOW WHICH since doesn't allow it to be on the master account and the subs use it and each sub has to subscribe. I had a conversation with Amazon about that and was told that they'd get back to me . . . yeh, right.

 

[joewhite57]

Have you complained to HBO/AT&T about their negotiating tactics? How many non-existent HBO subscribers are you willing to pay for to bring it back?

Myself I am preparing to subscribe near the end of the month. Enjoy the limited value HBO offers. Then drop it. Supply and demand economy works two ways!

 

[NYDutch]

AT&T has made it pretty clear they want to move all of their TV service subscribers to streaming eventually. Maybe this is one of their tactics to force the issue. They profit more from direct HBO Now subscriptions than they do wholesaling the service to Dish and the cable companies.

 

[Cubs1]

I rather bring back to dish i like it way it and bring back hbo and Cinemax that it I’m still waiting and consumer service say they still
Negotiating I don’t know how longer wait it’s no make sense at all I don’t know if hbo doing on purpose or dish I can’t see how I believe both that’s one problem


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[NYDutch]

I rather bring back to dish i like it way it and bring back hbo and Cinemax that it I’m still waiting and consumer service say they still
Negotiating I don’t know how longer wait it’s no make sense at all I don’t know if hbo doing on purpose or dish I can’t see how I believe both that’s one problem

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

Dish doesn't want to pay for more subscribers than they have. Until HBO/AT&T drops that requirement, I don't expect to see a settlement. Dish has likely already lost most of the subscribers that would switch services because of this, so there's little point in them giving up very much now to get it back.

 

[Cubs1]

Will see what happen if hbo coming back dish I will be happy stay with dish


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[navychop]

Cubs1: I believe it is very unlikely HBO is coming back to Dish. Ever.

In a few months, HBO will not be the HBO as we know it. They are changing it to be more like Netflix.

Accept this, and get HBONow or do without. It appears HBO wants to deal with consumers directly, not thru Dish anymore.


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[mwdxer1]

Cubs1: I believe it is very unlikely HBO is coming back to Dish. Ever.

In a few months, HBO will not be the HBO as we know it. They are changing it to be more like Netflix.

Accept this, and get HBONow or do without. It appears HBO wants to deal with consumers directly, not thru Dish anymore.

Expect more of this in the future. Why pay a middle-man when you can keep all of the money yourself?


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[ncted]

They profit more from direct HBO Now subscriptions than they do wholesaling the service to Dish and the cable companies.

I wonder how much more streaming actually nets HBO. Distribution costs for streaming are far higher than they are for Satellite. If I had to guess, it might net them a whole dollar per month more for the average subscriber, but that is just a number that feels right and isn't based on anything concrete. It could be far less.

 

[navychop]

I suspect they are making the shift based on future expectations. They may be right. But I think they’ve trashed their brand name and will just be an also ran.

Profitable? Sure. Dominant? Not likely. And no recovery from here.


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[JSheridan]

A few short years ago when AT&T acquired DirecTV they promptly began switching their UVerse IPTV customers to DirecTV. Now they claim they're going to switch all their satellite customers to IPTV. It's anyone's guess what they'll do next.

 

[mwdxer1]

I wonder if AT&T wants Direct TV to stay on satellite? Direct TV is not all that popular with their streaming service. Sling has many more subs.

 

[pattykay]

A few short years ago when AT&T acquired DirecTV they promptly began switching their UVerse IPTV customers to DirecTV. Now they claim they're going to switch all their satellite customers to IPTV. It's anyone's guess what they'll do next.

Bring HBO and Cinemax back to Dish? Okay, that is not a very good guess, but it is a guess nonetheless.

 

[dishdude]

I suspect they are making the shift based on future expectations. They may be right. But I think they’ve trashed their brand name and will just be an also ran.

Profitable? Sure. Dominant? Not likely. And no recovery from here.


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

If they have quality, original content they'll do well. I watch more original content on HBO than any other streaming service...time will tell if AT&T ruins it.

 

[NYDutch]

I wonder how much more streaming actually nets HBO. Distribution costs for streaming are far higher than they are for Satellite. If I had to guess, it might net them a whole dollar per month more for the average subscriber, but that is just a number that feels right and isn't based on anything concrete. It could be far less.

Do you have a source for your cost analysis? I don't know that streaming distribution per subscriber costs are "far higher" than satellite per subscriber costs. Keeping all those birds in the sky is a pretty costly proposition, not counting the initial build and launch costs that have to be recovered. On the other hand, servers are relatively cheap and backbone/bandwidth transmission services are quite reasonable from what I've seen reported in the industry. I doubt that AT&T is pushing streaming because it costs more. And streaming, they don't have to deal with the FCC every time they fart...

 

[ncted]

Do you have a source for your cost analysis? I don't know that streaming distribution per subscriber costs are "far higher" than satellite per subscriber costs. Keeping all those birds in the sky is a pretty costly proposition, not counting the initial build and launch costs that have to be recovered. On the other hand, servers are relatively cheap and backbone/bandwidth transmission services are quite reasonable from what I've seen reported in the industry. I doubt that AT&T is pushing streaming because it costs more. And streaming, they don't have to deal with the FCC every time they fart...

We did a whole thing on it in an DirecTV forum thread which showed that, for millions of customers, IP bandwidth costs way more than amortizing satellites over decades and running uplink centers. Broadcasting is almost always going to be cheaper due to the one-to-many model. I'll see if I can find it.

 

[MikeD-C05]

I dropped HBO after this month. I can watch full episodes of Bill Maher on YouTube just like I did yesterday. I’ve finished with Veep as it is over for good. The only other show I watched was West World and it isnt coming back till next year. I’m not paying over $16.00 and some change in taxes to watch one series I can get for free on YouTube.

At the end of this year I’m going to reassess paying for satellite any more. The one thing that has always bothered me since the beginning with DISH in 97 till today , is their fees. I’m paying $22.00 a month to watch the hopper and one 4K Joey. I already got rid of the other two joeys in the other rooms and added the fire sticks to save money but every year there is another programming increase that eats away at that savings. I could get by with Sling tv blue and the blue news pack and Philo tv for my wife and I could still record and watch what I do now and save a lot of money. The best thing about a Philo is it carries all the crap channels my wife likes and it is unlimited Dvr for like $17.00 and some change to watch it a month and it includes BBC America we don’t get with the Flex pack.

 

[NYDutch]

We did a whole thing on it in an DirecTV forum thread which showed that, for millions of customers, IP bandwidth costs way more than amortizing satellites over decades and running uplink centers. Broadcasting is almost always going to be cheaper due to the one-to-many model. I'll see if I can find it.

I would like to see the analysis if you can find it. Does it include the costs of producing and supporting millions of satellite STB's and the personnel and truck rolls needed to install and maintain them? Those costs pretty much go away with streaming, although some level of tech support would still be needed of course.

 

[ncted]

I would like to see the analysis if you can find it. Does it include the costs of producing and supporting millions of satellite STB's and the personnel and truck rolls needed to install and maintain them? Those costs pretty much go away with streaming, although some level of tech support would still be needed of course.

Here is the analysis of satellite distribution costs:

#38

Here is my quick analysis of bandwidth costs:

#42

TL;DR: By our best guesses, DirecTV Satellite costs ~$0.41 per sub per month while DNow might cost as low as $1.01 per sub per month if AT&T got the best bandwidth deal in history. They are probably paying much more than that in reality.

You may need to read the whole thread to get the full context. I guess the answer for HBO Now depends on how much people watch. The more they watch, the more HBO pays for bandwidth each month.

As for the question of STB costs and personnel, isn't that why we pay equipment (and possibly Protection Plan) fees every month? Once a STB is paid for, it isn't like we automatically get a new one.