DirecTV and Viacom? Let's make a deal

[sam_gordon]

Well you seem to have taken it upon yourself to determine what Direct subscribers should pay or that they are being unreasonable for not wanting increases yet you are neither impacted by the loss of channels nor would you be impacted by the increased bill.

I am one of the impacted parties and I don't feel the need to justify not wanting a rate increase or the lack of value I find in Viacom programming.

Somehow I haven't gotten my point across. All I've been trying to say through this entire thread is (IMO) you should treat BOTH sides equally. Not simply assume Viacom (or D*) is lying/spinning because you agree with the other's side.

If you go through all my posts, I've never said D* is wrong. The value of the missing the channels will vary by each person. Some (like you) think $7/year is too much to pay. Some think it's a reasonable increase after 7 years. In all honesty, it should be less than that. As part of negotiations, Viacom should ask for more than they expect. Negotiations brings that price down.

 

[sam_gordon]

but Viacom was the one that sent the cease and desist letter to DirectTV to stop broadcasting their channel yeah?

What other option did they have? The contract ran out June 30. They allowed their channels to be carried an extra 10(?) days because they thought they could negotiate an agreement. When they thought negotiations stalled, they pulled the channels.

Pulling the channels was the only leverage Viacom had.

Also the one that then pulled all their online content

Bad move on their part.

 

[Coconut36]

Somehow I haven't gotten my point across. All I've been trying to say through this entire thread is (IMO) you should treat BOTH sides equally. Not simply assume Viacom (or D*) is lying/spinning because you agree with the other's side.

If you go through all my posts, I've never said D* is wrong. The value of the missing the channels will vary by each person. Some (like you) think $7/year is too much to pay. Some think it's a reasonable increase after 7 years. In all honesty, it should be less than that. As part of negotiations, Viacom should ask for more than they expect. Negotiations brings that price down.

As a consumer I have strong feelings on the matter. Viacom is pushing for more money. I do not feel they are worth more money (and there is a decent amount of other Direct subscribers that agree).

It's not about one side vs another as much as my feelings as a consumer regarding the value of Viacom and also my feelings as a consumer regarding the way one side has conducted themselves during this. Viacom demanded the channels be taken down, Viacom used cartoon characters to target kids, Viacom removed previously available online content.

Direct has offered credits and opened up and provided new channels to compensate for the loss. Is it really any wonder why my loyalties lie with Direct right now?

 

[kaytieeldr]

So you're saying it's perfectly acceptable that Viacom must get by on 2005 revenue, but have to pay out 2012 (through 2018 or 2019) prices when it comes to their expenses?
And that Dish subscribers and cable subscribers pay higher rates for Viacom programming than D* subscribers?

Viacom tried to negotiate. It doesn't seem D* understands the definition of that word. Viacom took some drastic steps - well after the old contract ended.

Not their fault D* won't negotiate.

 

[Coconut36]

So you're saying it's perfectly acceptable that Viacom must get by on 2005 revenue, but have to pay out 2012 (through 2018 or 2019) prices when it comes to their expenses?
And that Dish subscribers and cable subscribers pay higher rates for Viacom programming than D* subscribers?

Viacom tried to negotiate. It doesn't seem D* understands the definition of that word. Viacom took some drastic steps - well after the old contract ended.

Not their fault D* won't negotiate.

Are they worth higher prices though? If they don't have enough to offer for the price they are asking it isn't unreasonable for Direct to say no. That is what I am getting from Direct..they are saying very few of Viacoms channels/shows are of any value and they dilute that value by offering the content online. Is that worth a 30% increase?

If they were offering enough of a value/draw I don't think Direct would be so firm regarding their increase (and you really think Direct is absolutely flat out not negotiating? Please..I imagine both sides have a bottom line they are standing firm on..hence the stand off).

 

[ICF]

So you're saying it's perfectly acceptable that Viacom must get by on 2005 revenue, but have to pay out 2012 (through 2018 or 2019) prices when it comes to their expenses?

I'm sure lots of people today in the US are trying to make a go at it at the same or less salary they had in 2005.....even though they are paying 2012 prices to cover their expenses.

Many could also argue the quality of the programming on those channels has gone down as well since 2005.

As I said many pages ago....they should have asked for a small % increase each year over whatever term of the deal they end up signing (and at somepoint they will reach a deal). Whether or not a 30% increase is accurate, that's what got reported and what people latch on too as being too high. If they wanted a 5% increase, I doubt anyone (even D*) would have cared and programming would never have been dropped.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Do you object to a 4.5% increase per year? Because that's what a 30% increase IS, spread out over seven years.

 

[ICF]

Do you object to a 4.5% increase per year? Because that's what a 30% increase IS, spread out over seven years.

no...but do you know that is what they actually want and not a 30% increase in Year 1?

 

[marmalade]

I just had to call Directv because they automatically renewed the NFL Sunday Ticket that we received for free last year and we don't want it, so I needed to cancel it. I just out of curiosity asked if they were doing anything for their customers with regards to this entire situation. The rep said they are giving all customers an automatic $10 credit for 3 months.

 

[rgf207]

I just had to call Directv because they automatically renewed the NFL Sunday Ticket that we received for free last year and we don't want it, so I needed to cancel it. I just out of curiosity asked if they were doing anything for their customers with regards to this entire situation. The rep said they are giving all customers an automatic $10 credit for 3 months.

I love NFL Sunday Ticket but the price is too high. every year I call them and tell them i'm going to cancel because it's too much. They have always lowered the cost for me (usually by 50%). Just wanted to point that out incase you really liked it.

 

[marmalade]

I love NFL Sunday Ticket but the price is too high. every year I call them and tell them i'm going to cancel because it's too much. They have always lowered the cost for me (usually by 50%). Just wanted to point that out incase you really liked it.

They did offer to reduce it, but even with the discount it just didn't seem worth it. We are Bills fans, and if they are blacked-out that week we just watch the highlights on the news.

 

[sam_gordon]

The rep said they are giving all customers an automatic $10 credit for 3 months.

So, they'll give out $600M in credits over the next three months, but won't pay $1B over the life of the contract.

Makes sense to me!

 

[Coconut36]

So, they'll give out $600M in credits over the next three months, but won't pay $1B over the life of the contract.

Makes sense to me!

I am guessing they have analysts that have looked at what they would lose if customers left (no credit offered) and what would happen if customers left due to Viacom rate increase and determined what they think is their best scenario/what will cost them the least amount of money in the long run.

They run the risk of losing X number of customers if they raise rates due to the increase..not just losing $10 for a few months but losing their entire amount for good. The lowest rate is $29 a month..the highest $89. If you figure X number of consumers at any of those rates walks away they stand to lose a lot more than the $10 credit they are giving out now.

 

[sam_gordon]

I am guessing they have analysts that have looked at what they would lose if customers left (no credit offered) and what would happen if customers left due to Viacom rate increase and determined what they think is their best scenario/what will cost them the least amount of money in the long run.

They run the risk of losing X number of customers if they raise rates due to the increase..not just losing $10 for a few months but losing their entire amount for good. The lowest rate is $29 a month..the highest $89. If you figure X number of consumers at any of those rates walks away they stand to lose a lot more than the $10 credit they are giving out now.

I'm sure D* is doing what they think is best for them. But there's nothing that says they HAVE to raise rates. After all, if Viacom can operate with no increase, why can't D*?

 

[ICF]

Looks like Viacom's ratings are taking a big hit.

Nick is down nearly 33%, MTV 43%, VH1 30% & Comedy Central 21%

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-nickratings-20120716,0,1495882.story

 

[Coconut36]

I'm sure D* is doing what they think is best for them. But there's nothing that says they HAVE to raise rates. After all, if Viacom can operate with no increase, why can't D*?

Huh? So Viacom wants more money and Direct should just eat the difference between current rates and what Viacom wants?

 

[marmalade]

So, they'll give out $600M in credits over the next three months, but won't pay $1B over the life of the contract.

Makes sense to me!

No one has stated the terms of the contract yet have they? I may have missed that part. Do we know if the $1B is spread out over a specific number of years or is it $1B a year for the life of the contract?

 

[Coconut36]

Looks like Viacom's ratings are taking a big hit.

Nick is down nearly 33%, MTV 43%, VH1 30% & Comedy Central 21%

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-nickratings-20120716,0,1495882.story

Not too surprising there. On the Nick/Nick Jr front they would do well to keep in mind kids are often quite adaptable. Mine started off ticked but no longer care or are concerned about the lack of Nick/Nick Jr shows..they have moved on to other stuff. Out of sight, out of mind for that crowd.

 

[usd2bmd]

My thought is this... Do some of the channels deserve a 30% increase, possibly. Do all of them? No. Some of the channels have a decrease in viewers.
If you go into work and your work product and/or quality goes down do you get a raise? Probably not.

 

[connorlevismom]

I honestly am not going to argue who is right and who is wrong here. What I am going to say is that if they don't bring back the Nick Channel's and VH1, without a rate increase, I am dropping Dtv like a rock. We have talked about getting rid of any sort of cable or satellite altogether since we have a Roku and Netflix so we can get pretty much anything we would want to watch on those.

I think this might just make that decision for us. Nick and Nick Jr. are my kid’s favorite channels and without those, there is really no need for us to have Dtv.

I just wonder if they would let someone out of their contract because of this. We have until November until we can cancel, but I wonder if they would allow us to do it early since they are of no use to me right now.