VOOM Goes BOOM - update Dish Drops all 15 VOOM Channels
- Thread starter jmjunkin
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 3K
- Views 253K
- Status
No such thing
There is no such thing. It takes 2 words to be a complete sentence. At least a subject & a verb. Such as VOOM was great or VOOM sucked. A single word is just and exclamation.
There is no such thing. It takes 2 words to be a complete sentence. At least a subject & a verb. Such as VOOM was great or VOOM sucked. A single word is just and exclamation.
You are certainly entitled to feel that way but it is quite important to the court case that has wound up as one of the focuses of discussion.
but other than that I have no idea why we are getting wound arounf the axle about what is enough "new" programming---and that was the contect I discussed it in.
Oh.
But seriously you can have a one word sentence. It is in fact called a simple sentence. The most common form of it is an imperative sentence where the subject is assumed to be understood.
"Stop!" is a perfectly correct sentence. And that is what we should do.
Last edited:
I agree...and it will only continue to go in circles until there is a court ruling. In another thread, I mentioned VOOM should close-out E*'s equity ownership of VOOM HD Networks LLC (both parties admit VOOM has been losing money), transfer assets to Rainbow Media, and transform the former VOOM product (channels, programming, operations, marketing, etc.). Otherwise, VOOM will effectively be awaiting the Death Sentence while the folks at CableVision wait for a verdict. Domestically, VOOM will exist only on Cablevision and they will loop content for the next year or two since it makes no sense to spend money on something you are killing. As we all know, VOOM dying a slow death will only bolster their case against E* should the court rule in their favor.
I see the case as consisting of two issues: EchoStar states VOOM failed to meet the Section 10 Spend Requirement, and they also claim VOOM failed to Certify Section 4 compliance requiring XX amount of hours of non-repetative programming per month by channel type. VOOM says they exceeded the Spend Requirement and Certified programming as per Section 4.
Reading through the nonsense regarding the repetitive programming...I get the feeling VOOM did not certify programming for certain months, as required under Section 4 of the Affiliation Agreement, because (as VOOM claims) EchoStar demanded the repeat programming (against VOOMs protest). VOOM later claims this was apparently done by E* to devalue VOOM programming, cast VOOM in a negative light to Dish Network customers, and make the public outcry easier for E* to deal with when (according to VOOM) they planned to terminate the Affiliation Agreement because they no longer liked the terms of the 15-year contract. VOOM even stated that EchoStar demanded better terms or they were going to find a way to terminate the agreement.
My bottom line:
E* illegally terminated the Affiliation Agreement because, IMO, it will cost them less in the long run to litigate the matter than to pay VOOM more than 1 billion in affiliation fees dollars over the next 12-years.
E* signed a bad agreement (paying a premium 2005 price for HD for then next 12 years when HD is no longer a premium service) and wanted a better deal. What was Charlie thinking when he signed that deal? I guess he was thinking VOOM was going to market the channels like they did the Rainbow Media ones (AMC, IFC, WE, Fuse) and get a better deal down the road (Best Customer status), and perhaps a nice share of the profits should some of the VOOM channels like Monsters, Equator and RAVE become widely distributed.
VOOM was happy with the Affiliation Agreement (it was a very sweet deal for them), they did not wish to renegotiate the contract, and they had no incentive to market VOOM to D*, Cable or the Telcos since, contractually, they were required to offer similar terms to E*. That's why VOOM would not break up the 15-channel lineup, and it's why they were still charging 2005 prices for their HD programming.
VOOM is pursuing the case because there is a lot of money at stake, and they like their odds of prevailing in the courtroom. Cablevision appears to be killing off VOOM (sticking the entire 15-channel lineup on Cablevision only) because marketing the channels may only hurt their case against E*. Again, this is my opion which I base completely on my interpretation of the few facts presented, along with a little common sense.
Both E* and VOOM have screwed over their customers to various degrees for the reason I just mentioned. It's no longer a matter of which one is the scumbag...it's a matter of which company is the biggest scumbag.
Of course, my opinion is just that...MY OPINION. Without having access to Confidential Information, just about all options other than the "VOOM Sucks" or "VOOM Rocks" are just as valid...but mine is the only one that matters to me.
Finally, I love debate and respect people, like Geronimo, who have formed different opinions, but are respectful of others and post facts to support their position. If unhappy VOOM customers are blaming E* 100% for dropping VOOM HD...don't! E* made a calculated business decision whether you like it or not. Besides filing a complaint with E*, you should further voice your displeasure by cancelling your service and signing up with another provide, if possible. Similarly, if you want VOOM on D*, Cable or FiOS, then you should place a call into VOOM HQ, (212) 324-8500 and ask to speak to following individuals:
Josh Sapan (President & CEO Rainbow Media Holdings LLC)
Rob Battles (SVP, Creative Services Rainbow Media Holdings LLC)
Greg Moyer (General Manger, VOOM HD Networks)
Glenn Oakley (Business Development, VOOM HD Networks)
Context is everything. When i made the statement that the only thing to debate is whether they met the spend requirement it was in the context of saying that we went a bit astray by discussing how many repeats monsters HD had in a day or how may hours of new programming RAVE did or did not have.
but I do agree with some of what Jim has said. For instance I think that Cablevision/Rainbow should ahve marketed the darned thing better. But hindsight is always 20/20.
but I do agree with some of what Jim has said. For instance I think that Cablevision/Rainbow should ahve marketed the darned thing better. But hindsight is always 20/20.
I praise when I receive good service, and I voice my displeasure when I receive poor service. I have no doubt that I have both praised and criticised VOOM hundreds of times over the years.Spatch said:
This is in response to those who question what was Charlie thinking when he signed that contract with VOOM.
It’s my belief that Charlie signed that lucrative (excessive?) deal with VOOM knowing that those terms would keep VOOM off of Direct (and probably cable systems as well) which was his goal at the time. In his mind he knew that when the time came he would come up with an excuse to dump VOOM and the contract he signed would wind its way endlessly through the court system ultimately ending with some out of court settlement favorable to Charlie. I don’t think Charlie intends for this litigation to go so far as to result in a ruling by a judge.
Smart guy.
It’s my belief that Charlie signed that lucrative (excessive?) deal with VOOM knowing that those terms would keep VOOM off of Direct (and probably cable systems as well) which was his goal at the time. In his mind he knew that when the time came he would come up with an excuse to dump VOOM and the contract he signed would wind its way endlessly through the court system ultimately ending with some out of court settlement favorable to Charlie. I don’t think Charlie intends for this litigation to go so far as to result in a ruling by a judge.
Smart guy.
Thats just a peculiarity of the English language. In some other languages sometimes the noun is not part of the complete sentence because it is already understood based on context. So there is no need to say it again.
Anyways back to the topic. While the repeats on VOOM were pretty bad the quality was second to none. One thing Dish doesnt have yet is AMC-HD. I'm visiting friends at the moment and they have Comcast. Red October was on. I had seen it earlier on HDNetmovies and it was also recently on UniHD. The quality on both was very good and no stretchovision. Anyways, not only was the movie on AMC-HD stretched but the quality was worse than a good letterboxed SD broadcast zoomed in by my HDTV. Perhaps that particular movie was an annomaly but channels like that I can do without.
Yes Red October was a repeat. But the last time it was shown I think was at least a year before (a few months before I signed up with Dish). Not like the Kurosawa movies showing every single month. True classics but that was pretty ridiculous.
Sorry this respose came while I was typing my earlier post.
It could work both ways. VOOM knew that since Charlie didnt want them going to other providers (an assumption on my part but sounds logical) that they could get away with things they otherwise wouldnt have been able to. It was a multi-million dollar game of chicken and things should have been worked out by both in good faith before it got this far. Shame on them both.
Hey, that person would be me...
I can't argue with your assessment of the situation...
I would have said "Cheesedick", but I understand your point.
You raise a valid point about movies. The su of the word "repeat" there is different than wih other programming abnd in some cases it is acceptable to many.
But English has one word sentences as well. I gave examples above of legitimate one word sentences where the subject is assumed which is what you are describing when you say " In some other languages sometimes the noun is not part of the complete sentence because it is already understood based on context. So there is no need to say it again."
Yep, for years many wondered why VOOM refused to unbundled their 15-channel lineup, and now we know....shame on 'em both.
My bottom line:
E* illegally terminated the Affiliation Agreement because, IMO, it will cost them less in the long run to litigate the matter than to pay VOOM more than 1 billion in affiliation fees dollars over the next 12-years.
E* signed a bad agreement (paying a premium 2005 price for HD for then next 12 years when HD is no longer a premium service) and wanted a better deal. What was Charlie thinking when he signed that deal? I guess he was thinking VOOM was going to market the channels like they did the Rainbow Media ones (AMC, IFC, WE, Fuse) and get a better deal down the road (Best Customer status), and perhaps a nice share of the profits should some of the VOOM channels like Monsters, Equator and RAVE become widely distributed.
VOOM was happy with the Affiliation Agreement (it was a very sweet deal for them), they did not wish to renegotiate the contract, and they had no incentive to market VOOM to D*, Cable or the Telcos since, contractually, they were required to offer similar terms to E*. That's why VOOM would not break up the 15-channel lineup, and it's why they were still charging 2005 prices for their HD programming.
VOOM is pursuing the case because there is a lot of money at stake, and they like their odds of prevailing in the courtroom. Cablevision appears to be killing off VOOM (sticking the entire 15-channel lineup on Cablevision only) because marketing the channels may only hurt their case against E*. Again, this is my opion which I base completely on my interpretation of the few facts presented, along with a little common sense.
Both E* and VOOM have screwed over their customers to various degrees for the reason I just mentioned. It's no longer a matter of which one is the scumbag...it's a matter of which company is the biggest scumbag.
Of course, my opinion is just that...MY OPINION. Without having access to Confidential Information, just about all options other than the "VOOM Sucks" or "VOOM Rocks" are just as valid...but mine is the only one that matters to me.
Finally, I love debate and respect people, like Geronimo, who have formed different opinions, but are respectful of others and post facts to support their position. If unhappy VOOM customers are blaming E* 100% for dropping VOOM HD...don't! E* made a calculated business decision whether you like it or not.
I agree with some points, but there are a few thoughts I have different.
First, I'm not sure that Charlie made a mistake in signing the agreement. It could have been better (namely, being more ironclad), but it wasn't horrible. Dish had several outs if the programming got stale. If Voom wasn't spending $100M a year (a good indication of quality), the contract could end. If there were too many repeats, the contract could end. If Voom gave another provider better terms, Dish gets the option to take the better deal. In line with that, I don't see Dish as illegally terminating the agreement. Things started to go south, so they took their options as outlined in the agreement. Had all of the stipulations been followed, Dish probably would have been happy to keep Voom because they would have been high quality channels. I have little doubt Charlie was hoping Directv would pick Voom up (as I'll explain below), but as that didn't happen, they were able to get out legally.
I also don't think it was a sweet deal for Voom. If it was, why not meet the spending requirements? Why not follow the agreement to keep the deal in place? I just don't think that certain elements at Cablevision wanted to invest in marketing Voom, so they sat on their hands and hoped Dish would keep them no matter what for the same reason they remain on Cablevision: to keep up their chanell count versus competitors.
I heavily disagree with the assertion that the repeats were at the urging of Dish. Even if Dish was encouraging this, no one could force Voom to do it. Voom only agreed to provide programming under the agreement. So long as they stuck to that agreement, Dish couldn't drop them.
Also, as I think about the timeline, I think it's interesting that much of this started to develop as Direct had its big HD launches in September and October. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Dish started to get more militant as it became clear that even though they had the capacity, Directv wasn't adding Voom in favor of unconverted channels.
I'm glad you are willing to have a debate, and fully acknowledge that Voom made many mistakes as well. And of course, my statements represent my opinion as well.
AND, the premiums take your money and still show 99% crap. So you could easily have a Netflix account and saved the trouble.
So your answer now is that Voom was crap? Yeah, fine. That's all we have now is crap AND is cut, edited, and filled with ads. What a bonus!!!
Impossible - the post began with proof that new shows and new episodes were being shown so how could someone's comment that nothing new was on be applied to the WHOLE PACKAGE?
In your definition of new, you want a new pop top 40 movie theatre release and that is not what VOOM was all about.
Only Smithsonian comes close to what Voom offered. The rest of the new channels are a waste.
- Status
