Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Television Media Businesses Entertainment

Echostar/Dish Network Pulls Viacom Channels 702

Posted by timothy from the take-that dept.
RedWolves2 writes "As was mentioned yesterday, Viacom was trying to warn Dish Network customers over the weekend that its channels were going to be pulled from their service. Well today those channels were finally pulled. 'EchoStar Communications Corp. on Tuesday pulled from service 16 of Viacom's local CBS stations and 10 of its national channels after the companies failed to agree on contract terms and prices.' Echostar will provide a $1 monthly credit to customers who lose programming while the channels are unavailable. Sorry but $1 a month is not exactly a fair trade off. DirecTV sounds like a great choice."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Echostar/Dish Network Pulls Viacom Channels More

Echostar/Dish Network Pulls Viacom Channels

Comments Filter:

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:52PM (#8517077)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:Not good enough (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Nevo ( 690791 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:53PM (#8517083)
      The problem for Echostar is that most of their customers have no idea that Viacom is at fault here; they're going to blame Echostar.

      I'm sure glad I don't work for Echostar's PR department.

    • Re:Not good enough (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Brad1138 ( 590148 ) <brad1138@yahoo.com> on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:26PM (#8517388)
      I am an installer for Dish Network & DirecTV. The fact that our government allows cable companies to own television stations is very troubling. The same thing is going to happen to DirecTV as soon as it's contract runs out. Comcast is trying to buy Disney (who owns ABC/ESPN as well as a host of others). If both comcast and viacomm own a large portion of all television stations and are allowed to screw the satellite companies by WAY overcharging it could put the satellite co.s out of business and then the Cable Co.s would be an even bigger monopoly.

    • This happened in Columbus a few years back (Score:5, Interesting)

      by clark625 ( 308380 ) <clark625@nOspam.yahoo.com> on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:36PM (#8517474) Homepage
      Here in Columbus (OH), about three years ago the local CBS affiliate started pressuring Time Warner to carry Ohio News Network on their basic analog cable service in order to continue rebroadcasting CBS. It was a mess, and all the other news agencies loved it. Everything went nuts about a month before the contract renewal deadline, and both sides dug in.

      About two weeks before the station was to be pulled from the lineup, Time Warner sent rabbit ears to every customer and included instructions (both written and on their special channel running every half hour). If a customer wasn't sure how to set things up, a tech would even come out before the deadline so that CBS would still work seemlessly. Time Warner took the game to a level the CBS affiliate wasn't ready for.

      The end result: Time Warner agreed to carry ONN on digital cable, and the CBS station stayed on regular analog cable. I'm not sure, but I don't believe there was even a rate increase given to the CBS station.

      I wouldn't be surprised if these tactics by Viacom end up with the exact same result. Dish may lose a few customers in this, but that's nothing compared to the marketshare Viacom loses if people don't just randomly stumble onto their channel and watch for a half hour. If your station isn't even offered, people just can't watch it, and advertisers just don't want to pay lots of money for that. The price of poker is high here, but I'm pretty sure Viacom's in the position with the most to lose (and the potential gains are only modest).
      • I'm not sure that Viacom is on the short end of this stick. Viacom only loses the advertising that they can pipe to EchoStar customers, a pretty small portion of their total advertising. On the other hand, EchoStar loses a significant chunk of programming available to EchoStar customers, or their entire customer base.

        If Viacom really does decide they're making a mistake, they won't have to twist EchoStar's arm to sign a contract under the previous terms. At that point, Viacom won't have lost much, but E
        • Viacom only loses the advertising that they can pipe to EchoStar customers, a pretty small portion of their total advertising.

          Actually, Echostar/DishNetwork hold about 8-9% of 'cable' television subscribers in the US. 8% spread across 5 or 6 networks seems like an awful lot to lose compared to Dish losing a few customers who can't live without South Park reruns.

      • Re:This happened in Columbus a few years back (Score:5, Funny)

        by TGK ( 262438 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:55PM (#8517642) Homepage Journal
        I'm actualy kind of supprised at the lengths Viacom has been willing to go on this one.

        They recently did an add in which Sponge Bob Square Pants told kids that they would never see him again if they didn't get their parrents to drop Dish Network.

        That's just hard core.

    • Re:Not good enough (Score:3, Insightful)

      by NanoGator ( 522640 )
      " That said however, CBS has CSI and Survivor, for most people $1/month is nowhere near good enough."

      Depends on how one does the math. If you have lots of channels, and the ones that disappeared are less than 1/30th of the total channels, then to a bean counter it's not so unreasonable.

      I agree that it sucks, but if they were to deduct like $5, then you'd expect that 1/6th of the channels were gone, or something like that.
      • If CBS is one of, say, 5 channels that you actually watch, then knocking off $1 doesn't go very far.

        I can't see Viacom holding out on this. If they do, it will set a bad precedent for extorting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H ...no, extorting... money from DirectTV and Cable in the future. The way the media companies are consolidating, its only a matter of time before our 150 "basic" channels are really just 50-incarnations each of 3 channels (Viacom, ClearChannel, and Time Warner).

  • How about charging people that WANT BET & MTV? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by -Surak- ( 31268 ) * on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:53PM (#8517079)
    How about reducing all the packages back to where they were last year, and charging the people who actually WANT Viacom's crap a couple bucks a month? I think I can survive without Racist Entertainment TV & No-Music TV.

    Yeah, okay, no South Park is gonna hurt, but that's what the net is for.

    I have to give Charlie credit for standing up to viacom.

    • Re:How about charging people that WANT BET & M (Score:5, Insightful)

      by gcaseye6677 ( 694805 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:06PM (#8517198)
      But Viacom won't allow this. Because who would actually pay extra for the garbage channels? If any satellite or cable operator were to threaten to seperate the channels into their own package or to charge individually for them, Viacom would then pull the plug on all of their channels. No company could survive with no Viacom channels, so they give in and pay a huge amount of money for all of them. Disney tried the same thing with Cox Cable. Funny, these types of sales tactics used to be called racketeering and were actually illegal. Imagine if GM had 95% of the American auto market and built their cars to only run on GM brand gasoline?

    • Re:How about charging people that WANT BET & M (Score:4, Informative)

      by LostCluster ( 625375 ) * on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:59PM (#8517681)
      Viacom just won't go for that. Their terms are their terms and they are NOT flexible at all with them. The signal providers must put all of Viacom's big-name channels in their lowest tier of pay-channel service, and pay the rates Viacom wants to charge per subscriber for them.

      The distributors are not being given a line item veto. They must accept the entire package, or get none of it. Right now, Echostar's calling that bluff and buying none of it.

      It's a standoff all right... the only questions are how long this will go on before somebody blinks, and which side will it be?

  • A great deal (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:53PM (#8517086)
    Hell. They oughta charge an extra $5 monthly for filtering MTV and Nickelodeon out of your home. I'd pay it.

  • Viacom is disrupting my TV (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bulldog2260 ( 649125 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:53PM (#8517090) Journal
    I have Charter Cable, and viacom is running ads stating the obivous, that EchoStar/Dish Network is not meeting demands, and airing it on all providers.

    This whole situation does not affect me, why bother me?

    • Re:Viacom is disrupting my TV (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Altanar ( 56809 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:58PM (#8517123)
      Not 'meeting demand' is just a euphonism for 'not willing to raise prices'. I'm sorry, but the networks like Viacom had their way, we'd all be paying out the ass for their 'services'. Oh wait, cable users do that already.

      I applaud Dish Network for taking a stand on Viacom's monopolistic and unfair rate hikes.

    • Re:Viacom is disrupting my TV (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Most likely they are using the same feed for cable and Dish. Time on geosynchronous satellites isn't free and there is normally no reason for a separate feed.

      I'm mad enough, that I'm going to stop watching Viacom. Oh, wait. That's no good. It's really the products I should boycott, but I don't see any commercials (ReplayTV). Ok! I'm going to start watching commercials Viacom, so I cannot buy the products they advertise! Wait, that doesn't sound like much fun.

    • Re:Viacom is disrupting my TV (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Motherfucking Shit ( 636021 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:41PM (#8517522) Journal
      Viacom is disrupting my TV
      Same here, on Time Warner Cable. You might try filling out the FCC's general complaint [fcc.gov] form. It's geared towards telephone complaints but you can choose "The subject of my complaint is not listed," and fill everything out manually. I couldn't locate a form specifically meant for cable or broadcast, so I guess this one should work.

      Before discrediting the value of a complaint, consider that the whole "indecency crackdown" insanity came about because the FCC received a whole bunch of complaints about Janet's melon. If enough people register their displeasure at Viacom's irritating crawls showing up on unaffected cable networks, maybe the FCC will do something about it.

      • While you're there (Score:4, Insightful)

        by gad_zuki! ( 70830 ) on Wednesday March 10, 2004 @04:11AM (#8518920)
        > You might try filling out the FCC's general complaint

        • While you're there
        • See if they can make it illegal to own both a broadcast network and a cable channel.
        • See if they can help you get out a cable/sat contract which changes its terms without paying a fee.
        • See if they can stop your signal provider from reselling your info to marketers.
        • See if Mix Master Powell will change his mind on further media deregulation after this fiasco.

          Might as well complain about the root problem instead of the symptoms.

  • It got local coverage (Score:3, Interesting)

    by strredwolf ( 532 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:55PM (#8517102) Homepage Journal
    I heard about this on the 5pm newscast here in Maryland. Echostar/DishNetwork pulled out a Baltimore station from their lineup.

    Of course, it was an NBC station who reported of the CBS station being yanked. The CBS station however was owned by CBS.

  • Sure... support Viacom (Score:5, Insightful)

    by worm eater ( 697149 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:55PM (#8517103) Homepage
    DirecTV sounds like a great choice

    Sure, if you want to support Viacom's unfair business practices. If they didn't force bundles on the networks, none of this would be going down. Viacom's 'bundling' is certainly no more ethical than Microsoft's 'bundling' that we all hear so much about...
    • Why is it unfair for Viacom to force a bundle on the networks, but fair for the networks to force a bundle on us? You're supporting an industry which survives through bundling. They innovate only when forced, for example cable internet was a way to continue to be a relevant company in this age.

      • Re:Sure... support Viacom (Score:5, Informative)

        by fwc ( 168330 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:28PM (#8517403)
        Actually, the way I understand it is that part of the deal with the content providers is that the cable companies/satellite providers can't sell the channels ala carte.

        What is actually hapening here is that Viacom is saying to Dish Network something like "We're not going to let you have the CBS stations and MTV and VH1 and the others you WANT unless you take the other 10 stations we offer which noone wants".

        I bet Dish would love to be able to offer packages where you can pick and choose, but they are (in some cases) prevented from doing this by the Viacom's of the world.

    • Re:Sure... support Viacom (Score:5, Informative)

      by ack154 ( 591432 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:22PM (#8517341)
      I don't think it's so much about "supporting unfair business practices." Some people just want to watch things on those channels. Given, MTV and such are pretty much wasted space... but if you've ever been around kids recently, you might know that Nickelodeon is still big with the young ones.

      I have a little brother and sister (3 and 7 yrs old) and for whatever reason, the can't get enough of the stuff on there...

      And I can't imagine what Survivor fans are going to do... (another thing I'm not a fan of). But some people just want to see watch that programming, no matter who owns it or usually, what they're doing for business practices. DirecTV sounds like a great choice now for some people because it's still offering those stations...

    • Re:Sure... support Viacom (Score:4, Insightful)

      by MBCook ( 132727 ) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:35PM (#8517464) Homepage
      I've got to say, I'm a little mixed over all of this.

      First of all, I like that Dish isn't bowing to the corporate pressure. That's good.

      The problem is that they aren't giving me the serivice that I am paying for (if I was a Dish customer, that is).

      But, I have DirecTV and I don't think I'm supporting Viacom's business practices. I have the top package (plus one or two premium channels) so I am PAYING EXTRA to get lots of channels. This is a fight for the base subscriber. Not me. Viacom is being stupid, but whether they're right or wrong my service would stay the same if this was happening to DirecTV (as Dish should do for people with the higher packages, IMHO).

      As for the Microsoft argument, I don't think that fits. The problem with Microsoft is that their software (like IE) is the default and it's already there while competitors have to have their software downloaded... and installed... and blah blah blah. If I want MTV and get Nickelodean bundled, that doesn't prevent me from watching Cartoon Network in any way. Both Nick and 'Toon are there, just as easy to tune to (just a different number). The barries for entry are the same (unlike IE versus Mozilla or Opera). Viacomm is being cheap, but it's not like MS doing it.

      Now if Viacom demanded that to carry their channels you COULDN'T carry compeditors (like Disney owned channels) that would be different.

      Of course, the consumer shouldn't know about ANY OF THIS. The FCC/FTC should have stepped in by now and put Viacom in their place. Isn't trying to drive someone's customers away unless they pay you more money demanding "protection money" and therefor racketeering? This must at LEAST be against "must carry" and fair trade.

  • The idealist in me hopes... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by realdpk ( 116490 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:55PM (#8517105) Homepage Journal
    ...that this would be the beginning of a ala carte(sp) cable service. It didn't happen when Disney and Comcast (AT&T) had their fight, but maybe Echostar can pull it off against Viacom.

    Of course, the realist in me knows that my cable bill will go up a few dollars regardless. (Yes, I have cable, but I'm sure Comcast will find a way to increase my bill too.)
    • It needs to happen on both ends. I have a Dish system, and for the most part I love it, but I really have paying ~60 bucks a month for the "100" channel package when 75 of those channels are either Home Shopping crap, or spanish/mexican/illegal immigrant crap et al. I don't watch either type or programming, which of course doesn't mean that other people don't watch it. If no one watched it, it wouldn't be on, what bugs me is that I have to pay for it. I agree that channel bundling is crap, but Dish and

    • Re:The idealist in me hopes... (Score:4, Informative)

      by dasmegabyte ( 267018 ) <das@OHNOWHATSTHISdasmegabyte.org> on Wednesday March 10, 2004 @12:54AM (#8518048) Homepage Journal
      Jesus christ people. This has been debunked so many times it's not even funny. Sing along with me: You will never have ala carte cable because you would not want to pay for it.

      See, just because you pay, say, $35 per month for 70 channels does NOT mean each channel costs $.50. The company receives cable channels over a satelite feed and there's not really too much rhyme or reason as to which channels come down on which satelite. So really, to get ANY channels at all, they'd have to charge you a base cost for each satelite your channels were carried on. After that base cost, the cost for them to provide you with an additional channel is close to nil...basically, the cost of multiplexing hardware, the way content licenses are currently issued.

      But the additional overhead of maintaining a custom channel delivery database, customer service training and so forth is not worth it. It's just easier to give you the whole block of programming and you can watch what you want. It actually costs them LESS to do it this way, which means it costs YOU less to do it this way.

      In short: you're asking them to do a lot more work. That means it'll be more money. Ala Carte doesn't make sense for the business, so it won't happen...at least not until all programming is available on demand (something satelite will never be able to offer). On Demand makes sense for the business, because it sells digital boxes, which in turn sells PPV, etc...

  • poor guys.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Digitus1337 ( 671442 ) <lk_digitus@h[ ]ail.com ['otm' in gap]> on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:55PM (#8517108) Homepage
    They no longer get the Sci-Fi or History channel, or even Comedy Central. Is there mass suicide watch?

  • What's wrong with $1 off a month? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rebeka thomas ( 673264 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:56PM (#8517111)
    Echostar will provide a $1 monthly credit to customers who lose programming while the channels are unavailable. Sorry but $1 a month is not exactly a fair trade off.

    Why not? When you're paying $6.50 a month, lose some channels, and then pay $5.50 a month what more would you expect? Free home delivered meals for a week out of every month? Sacrifice of the director's first born?

    Put things into perspective!

    • Re:What's wrong with $1 off a month? (Score:5, Informative)

      by jamonterrell ( 517500 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:25PM (#8517368)
      this isn't insightful, it's trollish. I don't know what everyone else is paying, but I assure you 1/70th of my bill in refund in exchange for taking 10% of my channels is not in anyway fair. Beyond that, most of us have contracts with them that will not let us drop and go to another service without paying an extra cancellation fee. And before you ask, yes, they have clauses that say they can change the programming, but so does every other carrier. Oh, and yes they did just settle a class action law suit on those cancellation fees last may, apparantly they didn't learn their lesson the first time.

  • Comedy Central (Score:4, Interesting)

    by StarWreck ( 695075 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:57PM (#8517122) Homepage Journal
    One of the channels being pulled is Comedy Central, I just canceled my Dish Membership today because of that.

    You think the Cable Company would be falling over themselves to get me back, but they're making me wait 5 days to get Cable!!!

    • Re:Comedy Central (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jmorris42 ( 1458 ) * <{jmorris} {at} {beau.org}> on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:26PM (#8517382)
      What sort of fudged up consumer (I won't use the word citizen for such as you) anyway? A corporate entity gets a hint of a spine and actually goes to bat for their customers and you go and betray them over missing a rerun of South Park? Ok, maybe if it were later in the month when the new episodes were running, but now?

    • Re:Comedy Central (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Chester K ( 145560 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:30PM (#8517425) Homepage
      One of the channels being pulled is Comedy Central, I just canceled my Dish Membership today because of that.

      ...and that's why media companies, the RIAA, the MPAA, and their ilk have so much sway over our country. They can do whatever they want and people will still crawl over each other to get to their content.

      • Re:Comedy Central (Score:3, Informative)

        by LostCluster ( 625375 ) *
        Comedy Central used to operate in a very funny place in corperate America. It all came from the history of the place.

        See, in the early 90's, at about the same time, Viacom's MTV Networks created a channel called Ha! and Time Warner's HBO Networks created a channel called The Comedy Channel. The stations were more or less redundant to each other, and neither could get any traction at getting onto cable systems since digital cable hadn't come out yet and space was tight. The system owners were mostly waiting

  • SCREW VIACOMM (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Alcimedes ( 398213 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:58PM (#8517127)
    people talk about crap channels on TV, but that's the point. the reason you can't just pick the channels you want, and skip the crap is because companies like viacom make you take the good with the bad.

    of all the viacom channels they offer, the one i want is comedy central. that's it. but i still have to get mtv, nickelodian (sp?), and all their other crap. I DON'T WANT IT.

    but i have to get it whether i want it or not, because that's the only way viacomm will sell it.

    remind anyone of a certain software companies business practices? you want Windows? you're getting IE and WMP bundled together.

    good for dish network sticking standing up to them. hell, i'll probably sign up tomorrow in support of the stance they're taking.

  • Yet more SCO popping up in this thread (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nukem1999 ( 142700 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:58PM (#8517128)
    DirecTV sounds like a great choice
    Aren't /. readers as a whole blasting EV1servers for caving in to Evil Company X's immoral and potentially illegal ultimatums? Yet the articles posted on THIS subject all carry an editorial spin of abandonment when a DN stands up against Evil Company Y's extortionist tactics? WTF?

  • DirecTV (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Balthisar ( 649688 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:59PM (#8517133) Homepage

    I am a DirecTV subscriber, but I've really got to admire Dish' handling of this. Granted, $1/mo. doesn't seem sufficient.

    One gripe I have with DirecTV isn't really DirecTV's fault, as evidenced by this thing with EchoStar: why do I have to sit down every couple of months to erase all of the CRAP from "Channels I Receive" list (freestanding TiVo), and pay $50/mo. for the 10 channels I regularly watch?

    Packaging isn't just DirecTV/Dish' fault, but the fault of the conglomerates' anti-competitive muscle flexing. You know, if I had to pay $2.00 per month for that channels I do watch (plus $10 for HBO), I'd still be at $50/mo., but I'd be much, much happier about it because I'd know (or at least feel) that I was in control of it.

  • They can keep their overpriced content (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Bloody Peasant ( 12708 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:59PM (#8517134) Homepage
    I'm a dish network subscriber, and in the package I get (dish 100 or whatever it's now called), about half a dozen channels have disappeared, including:
    • MTV and VH1 (sorry, never really watched them anyway)
    • Nickelodeon (my son is too old for it anymore, no real loss there)
    • BET (haven't watched it in the past, dunno even what's on it)
    • Comedy Central (ditto, though my son complains there was one program he used to watch on it; count it: one.)

    So I'm of a mind to send a message to Viacom: keep your content, I won't miss it. THPHHHHHHHHT! (with apologies to Bill the Cat). I'm much more interested in channels like SciFi, BBC America, IFC, and those wacky independent channels like Worldlink TV.

  • Sucks to be a Dish subscriber (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Grimster ( 127581 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @10:59PM (#8517140) Homepage
    I'm not a Dish subscriber, I live in the woods and no satellite service has a snowball's chance in hell of reaching me here, unless I throw up a 100 foot or taller pole to sit the antenna on.

    Why do I say this? Because I'm sick and tired of the scrolling on my screen whining about this, it doesn't affect me, I don't care. If MY cable company yanks these channels you can bet I WILL scream bloody murder, having a 3 year old, many of these channels are viewed quite a lot around here.

    If I WERE a Dish subscriber I'd be plenty pissed right now though, and probably no longer a subscriber.

    However this on-air squabbilng was somewhat entertaining, overall I really couldn't care less and would prefer not to see the scrolling on my screen.

  • Damn! No music on MTV! (Score:5, Funny)

    by sulli ( 195030 ) * on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:00PM (#8517146) Journal
    oh, wait.

  • I have DishNetwork (Score:4, Insightful)

    by savagedome ( 742194 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:01PM (#8517152)
    and I did listen to Dish Network CEO talking to customers on the off-air channels.

    He makes a couple of good points. According to him, their situation is like 'a consumer who goes to the gas station that is selling gas at $1.50 a gallon but ask you to pay $2.00 a gallon and after you buy gas, they ask you to buy carwash and wiper fluids'. Also, if CBS is really intetersted in getting consumer confidence, then they would've allowed Dish Network to air the channel to its 1.6 million subscribers.

    [Rant mode]
    Am I annoyed as a consumer? Hell yes. If I pay for the service, it's operation should be fairly transparent. I DO NOT GIVE A FLYING FUCK about companies bitching with each other. If you are running such a big corp, then its your responsibility to forsee and handle problems. I am not taking anybody's side when I say this but this is getting out of control. Companies there are more interested in making the buck without caring about consumer sentiment/service.
    [/Rant mode]

    • Re:I have DishNetwork (Score:5, Interesting)

      by ibbey ( 27873 ) * on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:23PM (#8517352) Homepage
      If you are running such a big corp, then its your responsibility to forsee and handle problems.

      And how would you have anticipated & resolved this problem if you were the president of Dish? Raised everyone's rates? Viacom is being a bully & trying to blackmail Dish into paying an unfair price and force them to carry channels that they don't want to. I don't know how long the negotiations have been going on, but Viacom really doesn't have much to lose here, so I doubt that they've made much in the way of concessions. Why should they. I think that Dish really deserves applause for there decision to stand up to to the bullies under the circumstances.

  • Sigh... typical submission bias. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jeffkjo1 ( 663413 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:04PM (#8517186) Homepage
    Sorry but $1 a month is not exactly a fair trade off. DirecTV sounds like a great choice.

    First of all, I'm majorly impressed that dish is not bowing to Viacom's demands, as most cable companies AND direct tv have always in the past. I also don't know how anyone could make a case on /. for switching to a satellite company that has blanket prosecuted people that buy smart card readers (Because everyone that buys one must be doing something illegal!)

    Secondly, to everyone but the highest teer (who already recieve every channel), they've added multiple channels until this battle is over. The added networks include FUSE (formerly Much Music) and several additional Disney Networks (to replace Nick.)

    I think Dish has handled this issue the best they could, and I think they're closing stock price (Up) reflects what people think of them vs Viacom (who incidentally closed down on the stocks.)
    • Maybe their stock price went up because they're going to charge all customers the usual rate for the next month (minus $1), and they're not going to pay Viacom for the next month.

      They're clearly saving more than $1 per customer by not paying Viacom. If they quit paying Viacom now and pissed off customers can't cancel until the next month, they're still going to make a lot of extra dough this month. Even if pissed off customers could cancel immediatly, many won't.

      I see a "1.., 2.., and 3. Sell Stock

  • What's wrong with this picture (Score:4, Insightful)

    by davmoo ( 63521 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:07PM (#8517204)
    DirecTV sounds like a great choice

    Something isn't right here.

    Microsoft bundles a bunch of crap, makes you take everything, and charges out the ass, and everyone gets all up in arms about it.

    Viacom does the same damned thing, and you start bitching about changing to DirecTV...a company that already caved in to Viacom's unreasonable demands.

    And I hate to break it to everyone, but while $1 doesn't sound like a whole lot, that probably is about right for what carrying Viacom adds to the package price for each customer.

  • Let Charlie know! (Score:4, Informative)

    by lannocc ( 568669 ) <lannocc@yahoo.com> on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:12PM (#8517249) Homepage
    According to the 2 minute message on Dish channel 101, you can let Dish network know how you feel by sending email to CEOofdishnetwork@dishnetwork.com [mailto] .

    I personally will be sending an email expressing my feelings that even though I am dissappointed to lose Comedy Central for an undetermined amount of time, I stand by Dish Network in their stance against Viacom.

  • channel bundling / Hollywood studio parallel (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Roger Keith Barrett ( 712843 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:17PM (#8517296)
    I mentioned this yesterday but it was too late to get much notice...

    There is an important parallel with what is happening here and what happened to the Hollywood studio system in the 30s and 40s. Hollywood studios owned most of the theaters at that time outright but there were some independents that were trying to stay in the game. The studios would work with these indeprendents, but in order to get a good A movie they would force the theaters to take 4 or 5 crappy B movies as well. This was found to be an illegal practice in the vertical integration lawsuits that concluded after WWII.

    This is almost the exact same situation... but now it's actually legal. It was made legal by Ronald Reagan who explicitly made vertical integration legal again (as part of his deregulation program) early in his presidentcy.

    It's an anti-cometitive practice and it hasn't always been allowed. There is a good reason bundling was made illegal in the trustbuster days and it should be illegal again... and the practices of both the cable companies and providers like viacom are a great example. Not all regulation are "undue hinderances."

  • DirecTV a great choice? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by bkocik ( 17609 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:24PM (#8517357) Homepage
    DirecTV sounds like a great choice.

    Does it now? [slashdot.org]

  • Figures..... (Score:4, Informative)

    by geomon ( 78680 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:27PM (#8517397) Homepage Journal
    I submitted this story earlier today. Funny it didn't get picked up then. I also penned a note to the non-managing directors of Viacom.

    To the Directors;

    I want to convey my sincere regret over the fact that Viacom has decided that punishing the customers of EchoStar in their dispute with the satellite provider is 'good business'. The only solution Viacom has offered to the EchoStar customer base in response to this debacle is "Current EchoStar/DISH Network subscribers who would like to continue receiving BET, CBS, Comedy Central, MTV, Nickelodeon, Nick at Nite, VH1, and all our other channels can easily switch to one of these reputable operators. We urge them to do so." This offhand dismissal of the reality of our collective situation indicates to me that Viacom is completely out of touch with the audience it serves. Many of EchoStar's customers have significant investment in equipment and annual contracts and cannot afford to quickly switch providers as your press release suggests.

    By punishing your *indirect* customers, the audience of your shows, you are also punishing your other customers, your advertisers. By refusing to negotiate in good faith with EchoStar, and by denying temporary access to your content during negotiations, your advertisers are losing PAID access to millions of customers of the products and services advertised on your content stream. If you have no regard for the audience of your shows, perhaps you should take the pulse of your advertisers to see how they feel about the current conflict.

    I, for one, have taken the time to notify all of the advertisers who have paid *you* for access to *me* through your content stream. I have indicated that the reason I am not making a purchasing decision regarding their products and services is due to *your* intransigence. They are losing thousands of dollars in disposable income a year due to *your* inability to negotiate with EchoStar.

    I blame you, not EchoStar, for this impasse. I have notified your advertisers that I will boycott all of their products and services until this issue is resolved. I will also watch carefully all future Viacom acquistions and voice my opinion regarding each proposal to the appropriate regulatory authority (i.e., FCC, SEC, USDOJ). This situation has certainly cast any future consolidation of the entertainment industry in a poor light.

  • Holding Public Airwaves Hostage (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cloudscout ( 104011 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:30PM (#8517424) Homepage
    This is why they need to restore the restrictions on ownership of broadcast stations. This wouldn't be an issue if Viacom wasn't allowed to actually OWN these 16 broadcast stations. It's ridiculous that they should be allowed to require payment for Dish Network to rebroadcast a local channel that is freely available over the public airwaves as long as they're restricting it to the channel's actual target market.

    As for Viacom's cable channels? The only one that has any redeeming qualities is Noggin. The fact that Viacom wants to FORCE everyone who wants to watch any of their channels to subscribe to ALL of their channels is just wrong.

    Even worse, they're using their powers as a media juggernaut to deceive the public. You know that story they keep telling about how Dish Network just raised its rates by $3 per month for no reason and yet refuse to pay an extra 6 cents per month for Viacom's programming? It's an outright lie.

    First, not all Dish Network subscribers had their rates raised AT ALL... and many of those who did see a rate increase saw a much lower increase than $3.

    Second, the programming fee increase that Viacom is asking for is substantially more than 6 cents over the course of the contract. 6 cents per month is just the first year. Think "Columbia House"... those first few CDs may only cost you one cent, but then you're stuck buying a few dozen more at $20 a piece.

    Third, they are also trying to force Dish Network to carry additional channel(s) that they don't want to carry. This also adds additional costs as they need to add equipment and manpower to support the additional feeds as well as using up additional bandwidth on their satellites.

    Finally, Viacom is trying to claim that since they've successfully negotiated contracts with all of the cable providers and DirecTV that this is Dish Network's fault. What they neglect to mention is that the terms of their contracts with the cable companies and DirecTV are SIGNIFICANTLY more favorable than what they're offering Dish Network... especially the cable companies. That's due in part to Federal laws that set forth specific rules for how much local broadcasters can charge cable companies for rebroadcasting their signals. These regulations don't apply to satellite providers and so the local broadcasters take the satellite companies to the cleaners.

    Viacom is urging people to call and cancel their Dish Network service. Dish Network is urging customers to call and complain to Viacom (and their advertisers... good idea) but what EVERYONE needs to do... whether you're a Dish Network subscriber or not is call your lawmakers and get them to start paying attention to the damage caused by companies like Viacom who are allowed to control such a significant chunk of the media without any effective controls placed on them.
    • Oh, and maybe they should throw Howard Stern off the air for talking against the GOP, oh... I mean talking about boobies.

      The last thing we need is more government involvement in media companies. Look at what has happened to broadcast radio.

      Let the companies flesh it out themselves. Dish Network does not have to carry Viacom and they chose not to. If you don't like it, go to another provider. Viacom has a product they want to sell in the form of bundled programming - I see nothing wrong with that. If y

  • Pot, Kettle, Black (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Daikiki ( 227620 ) * <daikikiNO@SPAMwanadoo.nl> on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:42PM (#8517524) Homepage Journal
    I sell Echostar's services for a living and really don't have any illusions about who the good guy is here. There is no good guy. This argument is born entirely of greed and the consumer is nothing but a little circle connected to the much larger Echostar circle with a thick black arrow marked 'income' on the easy to comprehend powerpoint presentation I'm sure is by now doing the rounds at Echostar's orbital death star. Having said that, The Dish Network product that Echostar offers seriously aims to offer a very high value for money proposition. They understand that the psychological barriers involved in switching to their product from cable are very strong. Those ads Comcast ran recently representing the disadvantages of satellite over cable really represent fears the average consumer has; unreliability, bulkiness, and long term contracts worry them. It's mostly FUD, but do not underestimate the power of it.
    With that in mind, Echostar has done away with a lot of these issues. They've dropped long term contracts and hardware lease fees, they've developed respectably advanced hardware that minimizes the number of receivers you need in order to watch TV in multiple rooms, and they've added service options for people who seriously think they need professionals to climb up on their roof and nudge their dish every few weeks. In short, they've invested hundreds of millions trying to create a quality proposition to compete with cable. Bearing that in mind, I have no problem believing that a 7 cents per consumer increase in programming price would result in a measurable, if not significant, decrease in Echostar's operating profit.
    Of course, as long as we're forced to pay for programs we don't watch in spite of the fact that we all have technology in our home that would empower us to only watch the channels we're interested in and pay the content providers who produce something worthwhile, we'll all have to put up with this crap in one form or another. Whether it's having to miss your Star Trek reruns because the company that ones the network that broadcasts the reruns that you want to see wants the company that allows you to receive those transmissions to force you to receive a cartoon channel that aforementioned company also happens to own and to pay seven cents for the privilige or something a simple as having television that's worthwhile being pulled off the air because ratings measure average viewing habits of incredibly average people with a below average degree of reliability, and executives multiply that by how much money they think they can suck out of these poor average people and equate the resulting dollar value to the word 'good' doesn't really matter. The only people actually being screwed are us, the consumers. If we're not being screwed, they're not doing their job. This whole discussion comes down to nothing more than 'who has the right to screw us more?'

  • What really needs to happen (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Eezy Bordone ( 645987 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:56PM (#8517658) Homepage
    ALL of the cable TV and satellite providers need to start giving me and you, the consumer, a better way to get the channels we want at the prices we want.

    I'd love to see a carte blanche system but it will never in our lifetime. Still, something where there are like 20 5-channel groups for me to pick out my channels would be awesome. They could charge me 3$-5$ per group and we'd all be happy.

  • Get your facts straight... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Glendale2x ( 210533 ) <slashdot@ninjam o n k ey.us> on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:57PM (#8517666) Homepage
    Echostar will provide a $1 monthly credit to customers who lose programming while the channels are unavailable. Sorry but $1 a month is not exactly a fair trade off.

    Guess what? Echostar doesn't own you anything. You should be glad they are giving you that discount, and you'd know it if you actually read the agreement they provide service under. Here's the related section of the agreement:

    "G. Changes in Services offered. DISH Network reserves the right to change the Services that we offer, and our prices or fees related to such Services at any time. If the change affects you, we will provide you notice of the change and its effective date. The notice may be provided on your billing statement or by other communication permitted under Section 9B. In the event of a change in the contents of any programming, programming packages or other Services, you understand and agree that we have no obligation to replace or supplement the programming, programming packages or other Services previously offered that have been deleted, rearranged or otherwise changed. You further understand and agree you will not be entitled to any refund because of a change in the contents of any programming, programming packages, or other Services previously offered."

    From http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/aboutus/RCA/ind ex.shtml [dishnetwork.com]

    DirecTV sounds like a great choice.

    Make sure you learn to read their agreement when you sign up. Don't cry about about it after the fact.

  • Viacom Response (Score:5, Informative)

    by thegoofy ( 301855 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2004 @11:59PM (#8517675)


    Viacom Press Briefing on EchoStar Pulling our Networks

    March 9, 2004

    Remarks by Mark Rosenthal, President and COO, MTV Networks:

    For the past few months, as this situation with EchoStar has unfolded, we've been trying to take the high road, speaking just to the larger issues and trying to ignore the gross distortions and inaccuracies that Charlie Ergen and EchoStar have been flinging around. There comes a point, however, where you have to respond, if only to set the record straight. And that's why we're here today - and we appreciate your taking the time to join us.

    As we said in our statement last night, we are disturbed and disappointed by EchoStar's decision to pull the plug on our channels. This is channel yanking by a distributor on an unprecedented scale. This is not something we wanted to happen or would ever want to happen. We are broadcasters and programmers, and the most important relationship we have is with our viewers. The idea that something or someone would disrupt that relationship -- particularly in an effort to extort a better deal for themselves -- is, to us, really reprehensible. And, additionally, as consumer oriented people, it really bothers us to see a company treat its customers with such disregard.

    EchoStar has been trying to paint itself as the victim in this situation. To hear them tell it, they were forced to pull the plug on our networks to protect their subscribers from the "exorbitant" rate increases and unfair carriage requirements we were trying to "foist" on them.

    In a word, that's ludicrous.

    Here are the facts:

    First of all, EchoStar is hardly some small mom-and-pop operation that is being pushed around. It has more than 9 million subscribers -- 10% of all multichannel homes and 43% of all satellite households. It is the fourth largest distributor in the U.S. and as a result it has enormous negotiating power.

    Faced with the clout that comes with having that massive distribution, we've been doing everything humanly possible we can -- for months now -- to finalize a deal with them. As I said before, the last thing we ever want to do is wind up in a situation where our viewers can't get the channels and shows they love. So in our negotiations with EchoStar, we were extremely flexible and offered substantial compromises.

    Now I hope you will keep in mind that every cable and satellite operator negotiates these sorts of agreements, and we have been able to establish and maintain solid business partnerships with virtually all of them. The sole exception is EchoStar/DISH Network.

    Along these lines, I would also point out that over the years there have been thousands of successful marketplace negotiations between broadcasters and cable and satellite distributors involving the packaging of retransmission consent rights with cable carriage. In all those cases, only one company ever had a problem with it. That's right -- it was EchoStar, which complained to the FCC about the same "packaging" practices it challenged in its recent lawsuit against Viacom.

    As it happens, the FCC decisively rejected EchoStar's complaint, pointing out that Congress established a detailed regulatory scheme that permits broadcasters to negotiate retransmission consent and cable carriage together. For the same reason, the Federal district court judge who is hearing EchoStar's case against Viacom recently denied EchoStar's motion for a preliminary injunction and gave us permission to deauthorize (which we did not do) EchoStar's carriage of CBS if we were unable to work things out.

    It's also worth noting that EchoStar has a history of bringing frivolous lawsuits and has been sanctioned or admonished by federal judges several times, including in a litigation with CBS when they were found by a Federal judge to have engaged in "clearly willful" copyright violations. Just this week, a federal judge sanctioned EchoStar in yet another an antitrust case they brought.

    Anyway, we could not have worked harder to

  • Viacom is the scum of the earth (Score:5, Interesting)

    by illumin8 ( 148082 ) on Wednesday March 10, 2004 @12:23AM (#8517859) Journal
    I was just watching the Daily Show on Comedy Central, and during the commercial break, just about 30 seconds ago, they ran an ad basically blaming the entire incident on Dish Network and saying, "If you have a friend with Dish, he'll be spending a lot of time on your couch". The punchline at the end of the ad said something like "Comedy Central, now only on Cable and DirecTV".

    Frankly, Viacom are the scum of the earth. I used to respect the Daily Show as one of the last bastions of fair and balanced (TM) news reporting available. Jon Stewart and the other correspondents seem to be the only (fake) news reporters that actually tell things the way they are, but for some strange reason they are totally silent about this news story, which is one of the biggest news stories on CNN and all other major news networks. I'm sure Viacom has given them a hush order or some other such mandate, but it really stinks of media bias.

    I've lost a lot of respect for the Daily Show today, which used to be one of my favorite programs, and I'm seriously considering starting an email campaign against Viacom.

    For those of you wanting to give Viacom a piece of your mind, here is the contact information for the CEO:

    Mel Karmazin
    M-F 9:00 am to 5:00 pm - (212) 975-6500
    or better yet, call him at home on the weekend at:
    (212) 956-1007

    Cheers, and down with massive media conglomerates.

    • Re:Viacom is the scum of the earth (Score:5, Informative)

      by segfault7375 ( 135849 ) on Wednesday March 10, 2004 @12:55AM (#8518066)
      Jon Stewart has absolutely no say in what commercials are shown, those are all picked by Viacom and the local markets. As for them not mentioning it on the show, yeah, Viacom probably told them not to bring it up. But hey, everyone's got a boss right? I am sure Jon has a mortgage and a family to support just like the rest of us. Don't be so hard on Jon, he really has nothing to do with this.

  • Dead channels (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jdk7of9 ( 760786 ) on Wednesday March 10, 2004 @12:23AM (#8517863)
    Why does Viacom bundle channels? What is really in it for them?

    Surely they would be better served by killing the underperformers, thus reducing their TCO for the "corporation" as a whole and making more profit on the channels that they did send...

    Seems to me that they should concentrate on making their offerings have more appeal if they want them to be generally available through cable and satellite. If the channels do not appeal to a large segment of the public then make them subscription channels, separate in their own right, and give the cable or satellite operator a share of the proceeds. That's a win-win-win. Consumers don't have to have the "martha stewart" channel, the cable/satellite co does not have to pay for it, and the provider gets pay per view dollars.

    Oh, but what if those dollars are not forthcoming? Well then, provider, you have learned that your offering is not wanted. Shut it down immediately. First law of the free market.

  • Dealing with Echostar (Score:4, Informative)

    by Lord Kano ( 13027 ) on Wednesday March 10, 2004 @12:36AM (#8517942) Homepage Journal
    Call into one of their call centers 1-800-333-DISH and complain to the agent that you speak to. When they tell you about the $1 off of your bill, demand to speak to a supervisor.

    Supervisors have a fair bit of authority. If you make it clear that there is some program on one of those channels that you NEED to watch if you are going to keep their service, they will be more than willing to write more money off of your account.

    1 month of everything for free is not out of the question if you play it right and you get the right supervisor at the right time. Hold out, never accept their first offer and you'll go far.

    LK

  • Viacom is trying to extort money... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by JRHelgeson ( 576325 ) on Wednesday March 10, 2004 @01:11AM (#8518152) Homepage Journal
    I'm sorry, but my cable bills are getting outrageous, and I just have basic cable. Cable costs me more and more every year for the same stupid basic channels I've had for the past 10 years.

    Part of the reason these bills are skyrocketing is that companies like Viacom are burdened with huge debt.

    They can't raise their advertising rates because they don't have the Nelson ratings... get this: Viacom brings us MTV and the likes of Howard Stern. There have been huge public outcries against such programming aired on MTV, Howard Stern and Viacom's other channels/shows. The media response has always been: "If you don't like what you see, change the channel." So that's exactly what people have done. They can't raise advertising rates without the ratings, so they're losing advertisers. Their debt is getting out of control, so they turn to the distributors.

    Viacom has told its distributors, specifically Dish Network, that it is raising its rates by six cents per-channel, per-subscriber, per-month. If I were a subscriber to Dish Network, this would mean my monthly bill would need to go up nearly a buck. This is completely outrageous in an industry where 1/4 of a cent in increases is big.

    Needless to say, this equates to millions of dollars per-year in added revenue without having to change a single business practice. [Read: easy money]

    I say that if Viacom wants more money, they should start underwriting movies and television that people want to watch, just like everyone else.

    I applaud Dish Network for putting their foot down.

    I say: SUPPORT DISH NETWORK, BOYCOTT VIACOM!

  • Was Viacom planning this? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Glendale2x ( 210533 ) <slashdot@ninjam o n k ey.us> on Wednesday March 10, 2004 @03:48AM (#8518838) Homepage
    Check out the whois on the domain "ilostmyfavoritechannels.com". It was registered by Viacom back in January! The page contains anti-Echostar remarks and links to go sign up for the competition. Check it out for yourself. WTF is up with that?

    Was Viacom planning ahead of time on Dish not giving in to their demands, so they could try to "teach them a lesson" by pulling the channels? What's with all the anti-Dish stuff aired by Viacom on their stations? Viacom keeps pointing the finger at Dish, basically stating that the channels were "removed."

    Maybe Viacom was setting out to cause harm to Echostar, who has a history of refusing to bend over and take it when it comes to price increase demands. Or maybe I'm being a little on the conspiracy theory side of things. But I wouldn't put such a thing past them. Everything they're doing (the banners, the anti-Dish stuff, etc.) only keeps pointing the finger at them and away from Echostar.

    In case it wants to change, here's the whois for the domain:

    Registrant:
    MTVN Online Partner 1 LLC (SMQELJVTUD)
    1515 Broadway
    8th Floor
    Attn Pier Borra
    New York, NY 10036-5794
    US

    Domain Name: ILOSTMYFAVORITECHANNELS.COM

    Administrative Contact:
    MTVi-Admin Contact (35876815O) mtvi-admin@mtvigroup.com
    MTVi-Admin Contact
    MTVi Group
    1515 Broadway
    New York, NY 10036-5794
    US
    +1 212 846-3367 fax: +1 212-654-9068

    Technical Contact:
    Amirian, Brian (36553847P) amirianb@mtvi.com
    1515 Broadway
    New York, NY 10036
    US
    212 846 3223

    Record expires on 16-Jan-2006.
    Record created on 16-Jan-2004.
    Database last updated on 10-Mar-2004 02:46:42 EST.

  • I applaud DishNetwork (Score:4, Interesting)

    by smack.addict ( 116174 ) on Wednesday March 10, 2004 @08:59AM (#8519998)
    I know the knee-jerk reaction is to say, "I'll go to DirecTV". But it is also the hypocritical reaction of the /. crowd. The problem here is Viacom. They are trying to leverage their over the air stations to force DishNetwork to carry cable stations that people just don't want. These "over the air" stations are Viacom's use of the people's airwaves. This is a severe abuse of a government granted position and I applaud DishNetwork for having the balls to stand up to Viacom.

    I won't be switching to DirecTV.

  • Will Kenny die? (Score:4, Funny)

    by peter303 ( 12292 ) on Wednesday March 10, 2004 @10:25AM (#8520623)
    I heard that Kenny might die in the next episode of South Park. Now withour Comedy Central I will never know :-(

  • You're all looking at it all wrong (Score:4, Interesting)

    by DRue ( 152413 ) <drue@@@therub...org> on Wednesday March 10, 2004 @11:14AM (#8521054) Homepage
    Don't you understand? If DirecTV still has those channels - it means they gave in to Viacom's prices. Don't you want to stay with the carrier that is agressively negotiating pricing? They're saving _you_ money in the long run by not putting up with this BS! This makes Dish Network _more_ attractive to me!

  • Try channel 347 (Score:4, Informative)

    by narsiman ( 67024 ) on Wednesday March 10, 2004 @11:29AM (#8521188)
    All Dish customers please try this one out. Last night they had the LOTR Fellowship marathon. Tonight is Monsters inc. This channel is being provided in lieu of all Viacom channel.

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close