| reply to URFloorMatt
Re: More HD channels coming by October. said by URFloorMatt:I think the belief that Verizon already has contracts in place to carry in HD most of the channels it already has in SD is correct. The trick is, Verizon doesn't have to pay the carriage fee as long as the channel isn't on the system. And as long as the contract doesn't have a must carry date, then Verizon doesn't have to worry about incurring any new costs. The claim was that "all of the channels' contracts with Verizon ALREADY include the HD versions as part of their carriage agreements," and that we, as Verizon subscribers, were therefore paying for content in a format we're not receiving (HD).
Hours after a number of us asked for evidence to back up that claim, the poster of the claim has provided none. |
|
| reply to Acct101
I would like to see channels we don't get in HD (BBC America, [adult swim] and others) have their HD shows available on VOD. I understand the reason these stations aren't available as live channels because of lack of QAM (cough IPTV cough) but we should be able to get them in HD-VOD if the SD-VOD is available. 
Please! It may get me to swap out my 2500s.  |
|
Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| reply to Acct101
Just because Fios has more premium movie channels, doesn't make them better then any other service provider. It just means they are showing the SAME content on more channels.
I remmeber the beginning of cable TV when the only premium move channels we had were 1 HBO and 1 CINEMAX. Those two channels had more substance then all the premium channels put together today. Premium channels today show the same thing over and over and over again. I'd rather seem them convert the Premium Movie channels to VOD (like Netflix Online) and use that space for channels that have current non repeating content. |
|
skohly
join:2009-08-19
Township Of Washington, NJ | said by Acct101:Just because Fios has more premium movie channels, doesn't make them better then any other service provider. It just means they are showing the SAME content on more channels.
I remmeber the beginning of cable TV when the only premium move channels we had were 1 HBO and 1 CINEMAX. Those two channels had more substance then all the premium channels put together today. Premium channels today show the same thing over and over and over again. I'd rather seem them convert the Premium Movie channels to VOD (like Netflix Online) and use that space for channels that have current non repeating content.
Excellent Point!! |
|
 aaronwtPremium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to Acct101
said by Acct101:Just because Fios has more premium movie channels, doesn't make them better then any other service provider. It just means they are showing the SAME content on more channels.
I remmeber the beginning of cable TV when the only premium move channels we had were 1 HBO and 1 CINEMAX. Those two channels had more substance then all the premium channels put together today. Premium channels today show the same thing over and over and over again. I'd rather seem them convert the Premium Movie channels to VOD (like Netflix Online) and use that space for channels that have current non repeating content.
But back then the premium channels only showed movies a few hours a day. They didn't start showing movies until 5 or 6PM in the evening and during the entire day just showed previews. I'll take what they have now over what they had back in the 70's and 80's any day. |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
1 edit | reply to osravens
said by osravens:I was basing that on FiOS markets only, but I was forgetting that some of the SoCal markets have FiOS.
These are the counts I have:
TWC NYC: 29
TWC Albany: 28
TWC Rochester: 29
TWC Syracuse: 29
TWC Buffalo: 28
TWC Dallas: 23
TWC LA: 10
some of ya all have way to much time on your hands counting every little difference between each market between providers.
If the grass is greener on the other side follow Jeep and move on. |
|
guppy_fishPremium
join:2003-12-09
Lakeland, FL
kudos:1 | reply to Acct101
And those that get into channel counts don't even subscribe to the tier with all the channels as its "to expensive" yet they want more channels  |
|
| reply to aaronwt
said by aaronwt:But back then the premium channels only showed movies a few hours a day. They didn't start showing movies until 5 or 6PM in the evening and during the entire day just showed previews. I'll take what they have now over what they had back in the 70's and 80's any day.
^^^ This.
No one buys that the 70s and 80s HBO and Cinemax "had more substance" than HBO, Cinemax, Showtime, Epix, Starz, The Movie Channel, etc combined. That kind of hyperbole adds nothing to the discussion.
The need for accurate comparison is why objective lists of channel counts exist. |
|
| reply to guppy_fish
said by guppy_fish:And those that get into channel counts don't even subscribe to the tier with all the channels as its "to expensive" yet they want more channels lol exactly...I think they want every HD channel in existence to be added to the lowest HD Tier |
|
| reply to knarf829
Re: More HD channels coming by October. said by knarf829:No one buys that the 70s and 80s HBO and Cinemax "had more substance" than HBO, Cinemax, Showtime, Epix, Starz, The Movie Channel, etc combined. That kind of hyperbole adds nothing to the discussion.
The need for accurate comparison is why objective lists of channel counts exist.
I remember in the late 70's/early 80's everyone loved their HBO for the 1st 6 months, then started realizing only a handful of shows were 'new' each month, & started complaining that HBO showed the same stuff over & over, people would switch to/from Showtime or TMC when those came around, thinking they'd get more "new" stuff, but back with the same complaints, they'd get "used to" Showtimes's 6 month rotation & start to feel the need to switch ... |
|
|
|
| reply to knarf829
said by knarf829:said by URFloorMatt:I think the belief that Verizon already has contracts in place to carry in HD most of the channels it already has in SD is correct. The trick is, Verizon doesn't have to pay the carriage fee as long as the channel isn't on the system. And as long as the contract doesn't have a must carry date, then Verizon doesn't have to worry about incurring any new costs. The claim was that " all of the channels' contracts with Verizon ALREADY include the HD versions as part of their carriage agreements," and that we, as Verizon subscribers, were therefore paying for content in a format we're not receiving (HD). Hours after a number of us asked for evidence to back up that claim, the poster of the claim has provided none. In that case, the correct answer is: they are in the contracts already, but no, we're not paying for them. That's not how carriage rights work. Verizon isn't paying content providers for channels that aren't on its system, and Verizon ever only pays content providers when subscribers actually receive the channel.
This is a roundabout way of saying that lack of contractual rights is not the reason that Verizon hasn't added many HD channels in the last several years. But that was, I think, already obvious. |
|
| reply to URFloorMatt
Re: More HD channels coming by October. said by URFloorMatt:This is a roundabout way of saying that lack of contractual rights is not the reason that Verizon hasn't added many HD channels in the last several years. But that was, I think, already obvious.
Not to some people. |
|
bsangs
join:2002-08-21
Montclair, NJ Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to MeatChicken
Re: More HD channels coming by October. said by MeatChicken:said by knarf829:No one buys that the 70s and 80s HBO and Cinemax "had more substance" than HBO, Cinemax, Showtime, Epix, Starz, The Movie Channel, etc combined. That kind of hyperbole adds nothing to the discussion.
The need for accurate comparison is why objective lists of channel counts exist.
I remember in the late 70's/early 80's everyone loved their HBO for the 1st 6 months, then started realizing only a handful of shows were 'new' each month, & started complaining that HBO showed the same stuff over & over, people would switch to/from Showtime or TMC when those came around, thinking they'd get more "new" stuff, but back with the same complaints, they'd get "used to" Showtimes's 6 month rotation & start to feel the need to switch ... "Firefox" and "Time Bandits" - think I watched those 30 times each in the first six months I had HBO as a youth. |
|
| reply to URFloorMatt
said by URFloorMatt:In that case, the correct answer is: they are in the contracts already, but no, we're not paying for them.
Yes we are -- we are paying for the SD versions of those channels. I do no believe the providers are charged TWICE for channels -- once for the SD version of a channel and once for the HD version. There is a charge for carrying the channel, that's it.
So if we have it in SD, we are ALREADY paying for the channel, whether we can view it in HD or not. |
|
| said by sbernstein5:So if we have it in SD, we are ALREADY paying for the channel, whether we can view it in HD or not. That's always been my assumption, but not everyone agrees with that. They believe Verizon pays additionally for HD. I don't believe that. In fact, I've read quotes several times from content providers who have said, when asked why VZ doesn't have the HD feed, "that we are providing Verizon the HD feed, they chose not to use it at this time." It's all about QAM space. Even with whatever limited space they might have, obviously Verizon would rather hold off, in case they need it for channels that makes them money. The large additional of Spanish network HD's is proof of that. |
|
| said by Greg2600:said by sbernstein5:So if we have it in SD, we are ALREADY paying for the channel, whether we can view it in HD or not. That's always been my assumption, but not everyone agrees with that. They believe Verizon pays additionally for HD. I don't believe that. In fact, I've read quotes several times from content providers who have said, when asked why VZ doesn't have the HD feed, "that we are providing Verizon the HD feed, they chose not to use it at this time." It's all about QAM space. Even with whatever limited space they might have, obviously Verizon would rather hold off, in case they need it for channels that makes them money. The large additional of Spanish network HD's is proof of that. My thoughts exactly -- you hit the nail on the head Greg. |
|
| Does by mean by october 1 or by october 31 midnite ?
|
|
