VOOM Cries Foul Over INHD and INHD2
- Thread starter rtt2
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 34
- Views 5K
Actually, both INHD and INHD2 were listed along with Discovery HD as part of the HD MARQUEE pluspack in the original VOOM brochure (start up kit) at Sears. And I've never seen it listed in any Voom programming schedule, anywhere.rudolpht said:
Yes, the original Sears brochure promised INHD, INHD2, as well as HD PPV.
However, it didn't promise EncoreHD, Bravo HD+, TNT-HD, ESPN-HD, or Playboy-HD.
And of course, it did say "Programming subject to change" in fine print
However, it didn't promise EncoreHD, Bravo HD+, TNT-HD, ESPN-HD, or Playboy-HD.
And of course, it did say "Programming subject to change" in fine print
In Jan, Voom is going to raise the rates $10/month. That should easily cover the $3 and change for INHD. I'm not sure what they're complaining about!
-John
-John
Im not sure its worth another 10 bucks a month. I believe it is already overpriced.jgantert said:
I agree with Vurbano. The 21 HD exclusives are the only thing Voom has over any other provider. Compare the SD packages on Voom vs the Dish Top 60 and there is no comparison. I don't think the 21 exclusives + the Marquee pack are worth $25/month (the difference between Voom basic and Dish Top60). Even if you throw in the Dish HD Pack for $9.95, you still pay $15/month more with Voom (not counting the lease price of $24/month), not a good deal unless they can up the PQ and unleash some newer content. I may dump Voom when the price goes up, I am still on the fence with this price increase.
I'm on the fence too. I'd probably be willing to stay if I could actually get all of my TV content from them. However, without Comcast Sports Chicago, it's a really tough sell. I should not have to go sign up for Cable or DirectTV or Dish to get the rest of the programming I need. If that's the intent, then give me the ability to just keep the HD channels and drop everything else.
Even that I probably wouldn't do. Most people don't want multiple TV providers. VOOM hasn't done enough since I signed up to keep me as a customer when the price increases. It's as simple as that. Give me Comcast Sports Chicago and a DVR and then I'll accept a price increase.
Even that I probably wouldn't do. Most people don't want multiple TV providers. VOOM hasn't done enough since I signed up to keep me as a customer when the price increases. It's as simple as that. Give me Comcast Sports Chicago and a DVR and then I'll accept a price increase.
I would probably keep them as an HD only service as well. I watch ZERO SD except for Survivor and I record that locally via Analog as I get a better picture than SD digital. I have the Dish HD Pack and watch it much more than Voom. If I watch DiscoveryHD, TNTHD or ESPNHD, I watch it via Dish since they have a better picture. I'd give them $20/month for the Exclusives and Marquee Pack.
The more I think about it, the more I convince myself that the VOOM claim makes some sense. Basically, what VOOM is claiming is that the requirement for minimum subs doesn't exist in any other contract with the current inHD carriers. For sure they must know that it doesn't exist in the Cablevision contract
Even if there is no minimum sub requirement for other customers then it still doesn't mean INHD can't require one for VOOM. If all the other customers have at least the number of subs that INHD is asking for from VOOM then there would not be a violation. If there are smaller customers than VOOM that do not have a minimum sub requirement then there may be a violation unless INHD can show that there are special requirements for servicing VOOM that do not exist with other customers. Without the details it is hard to tell.
What we do know is that it is possible for VOOM to provide a channel that was advertised to early subscribers yet they have chosen not to do so. If they will buy back my equipment I will shut up about it.
What we do know is that it is possible for VOOM to provide a channel that was advertised to early subscribers yet they have chosen not to do so. If they will buy back my equipment I will shut up about it.
I'm not familiar with the FCC rules to tell whether or not that's a violation. You (and everybody else) is welcome to quote specific FCC rules or previous rulings that may apply.jnardone said:
jnardone said:
I wouldn't quite make that statement. Sure, they can get that channel at 8.5 times the price its competitors must pay - hardly what I would call a fair deal and certainly not one people can hold them to.
Imagine if ESPN told DirecTV they could have ESPN-HD, but they wanted $40/month per sub. Would you say then that DirecTV just chose not to carry it when they could have because ESPN was more than willing to offer the channel?
In reality, Voom is viewing this as a "high bid" instead of a fair market quote. The same thing happens in lots of other businesses. It is basically saying "I don't want to do business with you, but if you are willing to pay this ridiculous price then I will do business with you." That is not considered a fair playing field.
By the way, for the guy who said $100,000/month minumum for fixed costs: a fixed cost is a one time fee, like the cost to run a fiber line from InHD to Voom's uplink facility. Perhaps you mean a monthly recurring cost, like the cost to maintain such a line and an account maintainence fee. $100,000/month sounds a little high for that. Perhaps they have been watching too many of those bank commercials making fun of the competitors' bank fees.
