WTVA, DISH Network reach agreement

[Mojo Jojo]

According to WTVA, DISH Network reach agreement - WTVA.com :

Last Update: 8:50 pm

An agreement between DISH Network and WTVA/WLOV/WKDH has been reached, meaning subscribers should get the three stations back in their channel lineup soon.

"Early this evening, we reached an agreement with DISH Network to put the three channels back on the air," WTVA Station Manager Phil Sullivan said. "The agreement's good through Jan. 15, 2016."

Sullivan said the stations are awaiting word from DISH Network operations personnel as to when the channels can be put back onto the lineup.

Stay with WTVA.com for the latest word on when the channels will be available for DISH Network subscribers.

Good news for those subs with those locals. One thing that surprised me is that the terms of the agreement are given out about the date it lasts until (Jan. 15, 2016).

 

[HanoverPretzel]

Good news for those subs with those locals. One thing that surprised me is that the terms of the agreement are given out about the date it lasts until (Jan. 15, 2016).

It'd be nice if they gave out the terms of the agreement, or at least how long it lasts, with all their channels. That way people would be able to check the status of their favorite channels before they agree to a commitment with a satellite company. I mean, if you get the thing so you can watch your favorite team, and your favorite team's sports network disappears the next day...

It might actually work to Dish's advantage to do that. Some people who are reluctant to agree to a commitment might if they knew for sure that their favorite channels would be carried for the life of the commitment.

 

[Tampa8]

That would be a bad strategy. So someone would sign with another provider because the contract is coming up in a month or two months and you might lose a channel. Lets say it's a channel you watch the most. The channel never goes away on Dish, but what do you know, the other provider drops the channel or moves it to higher tier. I think this is going to happen more and more with more providers especially if the economy is as bad as it is.

 

[HanoverPretzel]

That would be a bad strategy. So someone would sign with another provider because the contract is coming up in a month or two months and you might lose a channel. Lets say it's a channel you watch the most. The channel never goes away on Dish, but what do you know, the other provider drops the channel or moves it to higher tier. I think this is going to happen more and more with more providers especially if the economy is as bad as it is.

i don't think anything ticks a customer off more than losing the channel he/she signed up for, though, and then being forced to stay subscribed and pay every month anyhow. Talk about something that generates ill-will. I mean, not only will you likely lose that customer forever when his commitment is over, you'll lose a lot of customers and potential customers he spends time complaining about the situation to.

It's different if there's no commitment or you're out of commitment and something like that happens, because you have the option to call up a competitor and switch if it's that important to you. But imagine subscribing to Dish or Direct or whatever just to watch, say, your favorite hockey or baseball team on your RSN and then having that RSN disappear a month in and then being stuck with a 23 month commitment remaining where you've got to pay for a service that you really strongly no longer want, and that prevents you from being able to afford a service that has what you want.

It's the type of thing customers should have an automatic opt-out clause over, really, though I know that'll never happen.

 

[johnissoevil]

About a year ago, when Cablevision out in the New York City/Philadelphia regions had their dispute with NewsCorp over WNYW, WWOR, WTXF, and three Fox owned cable channels, someone (a rep for Cablevision, IIRC) had said that a new law needed to be put in place that states that whenever there's a retransmission consent contract renewal dispute over local channels, the owners of said channels should be required to allow the cable companies to continue to carry the channels at the old rate temporarily until a new contract can be agreed upon so as to ensure that the subscribers are not caught in the middle of it. Such a law would prevent cable and satellite providers from losing customers over a loss of locals. Such a law would probably not be passed anytime in the foreseeable future, unfortunately.

 

[Jim5506]

And how long would that "temporary" extension be?

Any "temporary" extension would just be an extension to the current contract, after which the two parties would have to start negotiating.

Without the power of the provider to withdraw its services the carrier has no incentive to negotiate.

I hate that channels are pulled, too and that is why I believe local stations who suposedly "serve" the public should not be able to charge carriers for their signal AND the carriers MUST carry ALL local signals (subchannels too) and carry all of them in the resolution that they are broadcast in (HD channels must be HD).

We have a local FOX channel that is not on DirecTV because they demand that their Spanish language sub channel be carried and DirecTv does not want to carry it.

 

[yelraek]

Hey Dish subscribers, are you still picking up CBS 42 or has Dish removed our signal? Please let us know. Thank you!

This is on CBS 42 HD's facebook page. What is your opinon of it? Check out my conversation with them about the statement. I am Joe Kearley

 

[johnissoevil]

We have a local FOX channel that is not on DirecTV because they demand that their Spanish language sub channel be carried and DirecTv does not want to carry it.

That was part of the reason for the Cablevision-Fox dispute. Cablevision didn't want to carry Fox Deportes, Fox Business Channel, or Nat Geo Wild, but Fox put a stipulation in place that they must carry those three in a package deal with the NYC and Philly Fox owned station, or nothing at all, which, according to Cablevision, brought the carriage price up from $70M a year to $150M a year.

 

[jerryez]

I do not get CBS 42 on Dish. What is it?

 

[byron]

I do not get CBS 42 on Dish. What is it?

I assume he's talking about this CBS 42 from Alabama.

Home - CBS 42 Birmingham, AL News Weather Sports

http://www.cbs42.com/content/cbs42/story/Keep-CBS-42-on-DISH/stQ6tLSDo0CYlIKJy3v__g.cspx

 

[Tampa8]

As always there is so much wrong with their statement it's hard to know where to begin. They intimate that you pay for locals with Dish, but it's free with other providers. It's not free with anyone, it may be included but not free.

I'm not sure about their insistence "by law", again intimating the channel must be withdrawn on the 15th.

But this one is the best, and shows why Dish probably has stopped negotiating if they have. "And importantly, you are ALREADY paying Dish Network for our station. So it is not clear why your rates should go up any further if Dish Network simply continues providing you what you have been paying for."
Really?? If you raise your rates, along with every local channel Dish carries, Dish shouldn't have to raise rates?

 

[Juan]

Its too bad Dish cant cut a NATIONAL deal with the broadcast networks..rather than a zillion individual deals..the local stations are forced to find new streams of revenue because the NETWORKS are putting the heat on them

 

[Tampa8]

It's the type of thing customers should have an automatic opt-out clause over, really, though I know that'll never happen.

I can agree somewhat with that, and have stated so in the past, but only to an extent. Providers lose and change channels, move them all the time, etc... and it is stated so when you sign the contract. That said, I think if you lose an RSN, or one of the four big networks, you should have some recourse. However even saying that, it has to be lost for a period of time, not just a week or so.

 

[yelraek]

I do not get CBS 42 on Dish. What is it?

Oops, my bad. I should have stated it is a local station in Birmingham Alabama. The conversation I am having with them is on their Facebook page.

 

[CK SatGuy]

And I'm sure the dispute affects all the stations owned by New Vision Television (including CBS 42): New Vision Television - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia