dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
15
share rss forum feed
« DirectvPrice increases very moderate »
This is a sub-selection from Pop!

itguy05

join:2005-06-17
Carlisle, PA
reply to 88615298

Re: Pop!

said by 88615298:

Listen everyone says the pay TV companies should stand up to the content providers, but when they do like Dish did with AMC looks what happens. these same people that made the demand left Dish for another company that gave into the content providers that paid the higher rates. So what does that tells Dish and any other pay TV provider? That customers don't have your back so why bother trying. if you're going to demand that your pay T provider stand up to the content providers then don't bail on them when you lose channels when they do.

So at the end of the day the reason why Dish's attempt to stand up to the content providers failed is because of the CUSTOMER and so in the end its the CUSTOMERS fault for higher prices.

If I remember, nobody knows what Dish and AMC settled for. As with most of the settlements, the terms are never made public.

Yes, Dish lost customers, but I wonder how long that would have continued after the first couple of weeks. Given ratings of AMC, I'd think not many care about them.

If any of these companies were smart, they would do a Comcast and buy a network. That way they could say "yes we got rid of AMC, but here is XYZ to replace it".

I know I could care less if probably 1/2 of the channels were not there, including AMC, ESPN, and MTV...


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
said by itguy05:

said by 88615298:

Listen everyone says the pay TV companies should stand up to the content providers, but when they do like Dish did with AMC looks what happens. these same people that made the demand left Dish for another company that gave into the content providers that paid the higher rates. So what does that tells Dish and any other pay TV provider? That customers don't have your back so why bother trying. if you're going to demand that your pay T provider stand up to the content providers then don't bail on them when you lose channels when they do.

So at the end of the day the reason why Dish's attempt to stand up to the content providers failed is because of the CUSTOMER and so in the end its the CUSTOMERS fault for higher prices.

If I remember, nobody knows what Dish and AMC settled for. As with most of the settlements, the terms are never made public.

Yes, Dish lost customers, but I wonder how long that would have continued after the first couple of weeks. Given ratings of AMC, I'd think not many care about them.

Couple of weeks? This went on for a few months

itguy05

join:2005-06-17
Carlisle, PA
said by 88615298:

Couple of weeks? This went on for a few months

Wow - didn't think it was that long - but a little Googling said it was July - Oct. I still wonder what the defections due to AMC were after the initial wave. In the article I read, it said Dish was about 13% of AMC's viewer base. That is a decent chunk to miss.

It would be interesting to see who gave first and how close the numbers were. Sadly we will never know.

I did find this that it hurt AMC's financials:
»online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142···934.html

So maybe playing hardball is in the content deliverer's favor. After all what good is content if your distribution is limited? Not everyone has their TV's hooked up to the Internet and most will not watch shows on their laptops or even tablets.