Voom addressed on the Charlie Chat

[FitzAusTex]

Isnt it going to be considered overkill by most rational judges that E* terminated the 15 year agreement when Voom had cure provisions that should be implemented? Seems to me that if Voom didnt satisfy the spending requirement the judge would say "cure the shortfall else E* can terminate the agreement". E* jumped the gun by telling Voom they had to agree to move to the Ultimate pack (in fact, actually moved Voom there) because of alleged shortfall, and then turned them off because Voom would not modify the agreement by voluntarily moving to the Ultimate pack. E* is acting as judge, juror and executioner in this matter, and that ultimately aint gonna fly. Voom may not be coming back to E*, but this is def gonna cost Charlie some bucks because of how he handled it...with the end game for E* getting out of what it was gonna have to pay Voom over 15 years...

 

[Cantonsurroundsound]

I sure hope it costs dish a lot of money and hopefully that might end Charlie's carreer?

The people at dish are evil and they should get what they deserve for dropping VOOM HD!

 

[riffjim4069]

Granted, the way E* ripped the VOOM channels from the lineup without notice only 12-hours or so after their press release announcing 95 national HD channels fits the definition of cheesedick, the only question for the court to determine is whether E* had a legal right to terminate the affiliation agreement based on a material breach, which was not subject to cure, created by VOOM allegedly not meeting the 2006 Spend Requirement. If VOOM can prove they met the "Spend Requirement", as stated in their complaint, then they should be compensated. If not, then VOOM pretty much got what they had coming to them.

Again, while I firmly believe many of the E* shenanigans and monkeyshines VOOM outlines in their complaint, it's really nothing more than interesting reading and foder for the masses. The ONLY issue is whether VOOM met the Spend Requirement.

 

[Spatch]

Wasn't that only stated in Dish's complaint? It doesn't make it true just because Dish said it happened. The bottom line is you don't know any more about the contract than anyone else here so your opinion isn't any more valid than the post your were responding to.

Mario

No, it was a fact they spent the other money on "operating" costs. Exactly what hasn't been stated yet. The money was to be used on programming and they failed to meet their commitment.

 

[Spatch]

Er...they were not in the most widely available HD pack since E* moved VOOM into the Ultimate tier on 1 February. You should probably read the half-dozen or so threads covering this topic, along with all the posted court filings. Again, VOOM was moved into the "Ultimate" HD Tier on 1 February. People not wanting VOOM (and a couple other HD channels) could drop down a tier and save $10, but this was in violation of the Affiliation Agreement and is not a fact in dispute. In a nutshell, the Affiliation Agreement required the VOOM HD channels to be in the basic HD tier and to be available to 90+ percent of HD subscribers (Penetration Requirement).

They didn't move them at all they were still in the Hd pack that everyone was subbed to. Dish came up with another Hd pack that allowed customers to drop what seems like the lesser viewed channels.
I am only guessing that maybe dish was feeling heat from Direct's offerings and felt that if they offered a better value tier (without the lesser viewed channels) they would hold on to more subs. If Voom would have brought enough programming to keep people watching they wouldn't be in this boat.
We will have to wait and see (or maybe it won't be released publicly) what the breakdown in spending was. What it looks like to me they were padding salaries with money that was to be spent on programming. Voom has a record of failure and it looks like they won't be coming back from this one.

 

[Spatch]

I sure hope it costs dish a lot of money and hopefully that might end Charlie's carreer?

The people at dish are evil and they should get what they deserve for dropping VOOM HD!

Are you even a Dish sub? Why would you want it to cost Dish money? If so, If it does "cost Dish a lot of money" that will be passed on to the customers.
I highly doubt the people at Dish are evil. That statement just has me laughing, while I imaging Charlie handing out black cloaks to all new employees as they pledge their allegiance to his evil satellite cult. Although, maybe they are transmitting secret mind controling subliminal messages piggybacked on all of the HD channels. That would explain why they switched over to MPEG4 so they could have more bandwidth to broadcast their evil plans. Maybe, Voom found out and didn't want to be a part of Charlie's evil plans. So he dropped them before they could reveal his evil secrets.

 

[bubba04]

Oviously the claim that VOOM didn't meet its programming commitments is a sham. IMO, Sean Mota has hit the nail on the head. Dish wants to simply renegotiate the VOOM deal and this is the plan to get it done. We've seen Dish do this to many channels over the years. Some like this poker player mentality. At some point, treating your contracted business partners in this manner will come back to haunt you. This is surely not over. Not by a long shot.
Bubba04

 

[mperdue]

No, it was a fact they spent the other money on "operating" costs. Exactly what hasn't been stated yet. The money was to be used on programming and they failed to meet their commitment.

No, it is alleged that they spent money inappropriately. It has yet to be determined if this is a fact or not. It has yet to be determined if they failed to meet their obligation. Again, you and I don't have all the particulars of the contract so neither of us can make an informed decision on who is at fault. Not having the facts doesn't seem to deter you much though...

Mario

 

[Peter Parker]

Actually one of the VOOM arguments is that it is appropriate to count indirect expenses that would normally be allocated to this in determining if the spending requirement is met. The judge has indicated that in his view it has to be money actually spent on programming and he indicated a precedent for this.

But as others have pointed out that was just a ruling on a motion for an injunction. it was not a final decision in the case.

I do not know of any party arguing that h money was spent inappropriately. All that really can be said to bea t siius s whether indirect expenses count and whether the require amount is based on 21 channels or 15.

 

[riffjim4069]

No, it was a fact they spent the other money on "operating" costs....

Hence, met the Spend Requirement. I'll let the lawyers and accountants parse words and argue allowable expenses, but either VOOM met the requirement according to the terms and conditions of the contract or they didn't. VOOM says they did, E* says they didn't. Moreover, VOOM states E*'s chief auditor reported finding no discrepancies during her Oct 2007 audit of VOOM spending during 2006.

You would think with the number of high-priced Madison Avenue lawyers involved with drafting the 2005 Affiliation Agreement, this spend requirement issue would have been clearly addressed. Apparently not...and without having access to all the evidence and artifacts, there is no way for any of us to do anything more than speculate.

 

[riffjim4069]

They didn't move them at all they were still in the Hd pack that everyone was subbed to. Dish came up with another Hd pack that allowed customers to drop what seems like the lesser viewed channels.
I am only guessing that maybe dish was feeling heat from Direct's offerings and felt that if they offered a better value tier (without the lesser viewed channels) they would hold on to more subs. If Voom would have brought enough programming to keep people watching they wouldn't be in this boat.
We will have to wait and see (or maybe it won't be released publicly) what the breakdown in spending was. What it looks like to me they were padding salaries with money that was to be spent on programming. Voom has a record of failure and it looks like they won't be coming back from this one.

I already explained that E* te-tiered VOOM by moving them into the DishHD Ultimate package on Feb 1st. I also explained that the Affiliate Agreement required them to be available in the basic HD package (aka DishHD Essential) in addition to meeting a Penetration Requirement of something like 93%. These facts are not disputed. What don't you understand? Would someone like to chime in...

Additionally, VOOM filed, in thier amended complaint, that it was E* who required programming changes be made (endless looping of content); they objected, but complied with the request. However, based on what later happened (E* terminated the affiliation agreement), VOOM contends the programming changes were done to increase customer dissatisfaction with the VOOM product, and thus lessening the impact when they terminated the agreement. Again, this information comes directly from VOOM so take it for what it's worth. So far, E* has not publically disputed their claim...yet.

 

[Tvlman]

Anyone who is bored by repeats obviously doesn't have tivo or a dvr. It can be programmed to record the program only one time. Somebody tell them that they don't have to watch them. Just search for what you want to see. Do these same people also watch commercials because they haven't moved into century 21 with the rest? FYI there is also an on-off button!

 

[Bradp56]

Like I said I didnt mind the repeats because every channel has them, and I personally dont have time to watch TV all day. This is why I dvr what I want to have, the reason I got the DVR was for the Voom channels.

 

[bubba04]

This issue of repeats is an over blown argument, imo. We have dedicated tv stations that show nothing but shows most of us have seen many times over. There is a whole industry consumed by the notion of people watching movies and programs they've already seen. You may have heard of this industry. It's called VHS and DVD.

Wanting new and fresh content is fine, but in the early stages of this HD evolution, content is not always king. Picture and sound quality is of equal value in my opinion. I have 7 HBO channels that gives video that I've seen many times. And the only reason I may stop at the channel to view it would be if that program was HD.

My point is, repeats are the nature of tv. We have them and they are with us forever. At minimum, they should at least be of superior video and sound quality.
That's where HD comes in.
Bubba04

 

[Apologist]

Outside of the Nov-March time frame Vooms schedule wasn't that bad af far as repeating. In that time frame at least with Monstershd it was horrible. 2 movies a day with many movies that repeated during the month. I love Monsters but at that point I thought they may as well get rid of it if it is not going to improve. It did eventually improve though. If what Voom stated was true about E* wanting people to turn against them I can understand why and how that would happen

 

[tomcrown1]

If voom wins in court then Voom will be back on dish why----the money paid by Dish would be hugh and well Dish might as well get something for its do ra me.

 

[Peter Parker]

If voom wins in court then Voom will be back on dish why----the money paid by Dish would be hugh and well Dish might as well get something for its do ra me.

I am not sure that VOOM is even asking for that anymore. thewy just want their damages.

 

[KAB]

If voom wins in court then Voom will be back on dish why----the money paid by Dish would be hugh and well Dish might as well get something for its do ra me.

Dream on.

 

[Spatch]

I already explained that E* te-tiered VOOM by moving them into the DishHD Ultimate package on Feb 1st. I also explained that the Affiliate Agreement required them to be available in the basic HD package (aka DishHD Essential) in addition to meeting a Penetration Requirement of something like 93%. These facts are not disputed. What don't you understand? Would someone like to chime in...

Additionally, VOOM filed, in thier amended complaint, that it was E* who required programming changes be made (endless looping of content); they objected, but complied with the request. However, based on what later happened (E* terminated the affiliation agreement), VOOM contends the programming changes were done to increase customer dissatisfaction with the VOOM product, and thus lessening the impact when they terminated the agreement. Again, this information comes directly from VOOM so take it for what it's worth. So far, E* has not publically disputed their claim...yet.

They didn't move them! On Feb. 1st everyone that was subbed to Hd still Had voom. Dish created another tier and gave people the option to change. It is Voom's fault that they couldn't keep customers.
The complaint that Voom filed may not contain any truth. If it is true that they were told to endless loop content then the people at Voom are idiots. We will have to wait to see if Voom can actually prove this. It is a shame that the complaint is public because it has people think that it is fact.

 

[Peter Parker]

They didn't move them! On Feb. 1st everyone that was subbed to Hd still Had voom. Dish created another tier and gave people the option to change. It is Voom's fault that they couldn't keep customers.
The complaint that Voom filed may not contain any truth. If it is true that they were told to endless loop content then the people at Voom are idiots. We will have to wait to see if Voom can actually prove this. It is a shame that the complaint is public because it has people think that it is fact.

The only ones that accept it as fact are those that want o do so. The same people are quick to point out that any statement by Echostar is not necessarily fact.