At the E* Team Summit this week they said 2 satellites will be launched by the end of this year. Now we all know how these statements tend to not come true in a timely fashion, but at least it shows they will continue to compete with the capacity D* is claiming.

From satelliteguys.....

"On these two Satellites they will be relaunching Dish Network in FULL MPEG4. All current Dish Network Channels will be available in full MPEG4. And everything will be receivable with just one 18 inch dish.

On these two satellites they will be able to offer the following:
200 LIL Cities in Standard Definion
HD Locals to 100 Cities
1000 Stadard Definition Channels
200 International Channels.

Again all on one 18" Dish with one cable coming into your house. "

What I thought was a even bigger change in course was that Dish is bidding on the ION Network (Formerly PAX). That would give Dish ~60 OTA stations around the country. Hmmmm.... That would be new waters for Dish.

Of course Comcast owns several channels. (Vesus, Golf ....)
Cablevision owns a few (Lifetime, AMC)
Time Warner I'm sure owns some.
DirectTV (Was Newscorp, now Liberty Media) owns several.

Interesting to see what Charlie does with this.

But back on Topic. If Dish launches these two new satellites that are MPEG4. That means that all of the receivers would also be MPEG4. Which means that all the receiver would be able to support HD. Which means why in the hell would you still offer SD locals in markets where you have HD locals since everyone who can see those SD locals can also see the HD locals. (I know there are several good reason, but I like this rant)

No HD national plans?

No HD national plans?

I found the absence of commments related to this interesting as well.

From what I read on Satguys, Dish is essentially going to launch a copy of their current service on these 2 new sats in MPEG4 (plan to anyway). Only mention of new channels I saw was more HD locals.

What I thought was a even bigger change in course was that Dish is bidding on the ION Network (Formerly PAX). That would give Dish ~60 OTA stations around the country. Hmmmm.... That would be new waters for Dish.They already have the national ION channel. At least in my area, the local version has the same, exact programming.

Hehe, I'm not talking about carrying the channel, I'm talking about Dish Owning the ION Network.

No HD national plans?

Currently there are 2 empty transponders on both 61.5 and 129 that are available for CONUS use. There are also 1 or 2 TPs that are only partially filled. Assuming they launch new channels with their new encoding hardware they will cram 6 HD h.264 channels on each, giving them room for at least 12 CONUS HD channels if needed, with existing satellites. Even if they did 4 per, with enough shuffling they'd have room for 12 national HD channels.

Given the announcement above, we might not see anymore LIL HD light up on the CONUS sats. Of course noone knows how this "two services, one company" thing is gonna work yet.

Hmm, May need to chk it out a lil more

There really is no need for Dish to make any National HD channel announcements until there actually are some new national HD channels to add!

Not bashing DirecTV here... but there's no point in announcing now that we have capacity to add channels that do not exist. As someone else above pointed out, with minimal shuffling Dish could add another 12 or so HD channels now... they could probably squeeze a few more in there with some restructuring and especially if they moved all current HD customers to the MPEG4 DVRs so they could move all the existing MPEG2 HD to MPEG4 encoders.

Any announcement of "future HD nationals" would be vaporware, and Dish knows it...

I will be interested to see how they do the new MPEG4 service... in that I wonder if they will convert existing users who already have MPEG4 receivers over to that service quickly or what.

Hehe, I'm not talking about carrying the channel, I'm talking about Dish Owning the ION Network.
What would Dish do with the Ion (/ex-Pax) stations if they brought them? Start up a new network with HD programming? Or use a large part of the bandwidth for encrypted subscription broadcasts? But Dish already has encrypted distribution with the satellite system.

I can get two Ion stations OTA (well, only one with my current antenna aim as the other is off at an odd angle & is a weak signal). Both of them are located well away from the major network broadcast towers out in the suburbs or boonies, which I gather is typical for the Ion/Pax stations. Ion is currently broadcasting four SD sub-channels, one of which is the Qubo kids channel which may actually be sort of useful. The main x.1 sub channel appears to mostly have a mix of infomercials, reruns of the more recent Pax original programming before they pulled the plug on that, and old TV shows (often with terrible picture quality). Waste a bandwidth as it currently stands, IMO. Would be nice if someone were to buy it and switch it to a HD network with some HD movies & programming with no more than 1 or 2 SD sub-channels (with low data rates). But I don't see that happening. So why the heck would Dish be interested in buying the Ion network stations?

Hehe, I'm not talking about carrying the channel, I'm talking about Dish Owning the ION Network.


That bid by Echo Star was turned down last week.

There really is no need for Dish to make any National HD channel announcements until there actually are some new national HD channels to add!

Not bashing DirecTV here... but there's no point in announcing now that we have capacity to add channels that do not exist. As someone else above pointed out, with minimal shuffling Dish could add another 12 or so HD channels now... they could probably squeeze a few more in there with some restructuring and especially if they moved all current HD customers to the MPEG4 DVRs so they could move all the existing MPEG2 HD to MPEG4 encoders.

Any announcement of "future HD nationals" would be vaporware, and Dish knows it...

I will be interested to see how they do the new MPEG4 service... in that I wonder if they will convert existing users who already have MPEG4 receivers over to that service quickly or what.

So now your reading E* mind? Big assumption.

So now your reading E* mind? Big assumption.

When it comes to new HD, there is pretty much nothing bug assumptions right now...

Since I was the one who was there and reported this and also had the fortune to sit and talk with Charlie Ergen for over an hour please allow me to chime in here.

During the general assembly, while they did not announce any additional national HD besides Cinemax HD, Eric Sahl did mention that Dish will always work to stay ahead of DirecTV in HD offerings.

And in addition since Dish is the only company who carries VOOM they will always be ahead if you look at it from that angle.

I also spoke on the floor to a number of programmers. I talked with A&E and learned about History HD before it was announced (by DirecTV) on Monday. They said Dish will be carrying the channel at or near the channels launch.

The same thing was also said by The Weather Channel for The Weather Channel HD, and NBC / Universal & Starz for their upcoming channels.

With that said I must say no matter who your satellite provider is, DirecTV or Dish Network, the HD is only going to get better and more and more channels are going to be added by both. For us the consumers WE WIN, and thats a good thing! :)

Scott -- did anyone at the general assembly ask Charlie why he gave up on MLB EI while Cablevision and Charter made a deal with no ownership interest in the Baseball Channel?

And did anyone ask if he really thinks a long-term future pitting, in effect, Dish's Voom against DirecTV's HD sports coverage can be successful?

Yes I did ask. And for the real reason was the price was still to high for them based on the number of people who subscribed to the service.

Remember not a lot of folks watch sports.

If ESPN was only available if a customer paid $2.50 for it, then ESPN wouldn't exist anymore. (Of course the same could be said for many channels)

DirecTV has been and from what I see will always be the leader in sports.

Thanks, Scott.

"Superdish" .... part deux? :rolleyes:

I've been saying all along that E* wasn't going to just sit there at 'watch' D* add all those new channels, and I got my share of flack from certain posters for saying it as well!

Only time will tell if all this nonsense is worth it or not. After all, its just 'yet another' press release coming from a different direction.

since ive switched from dish I have seen directv make claims on what they are going to do while I watch dish do it. They have added around 5 or 6 hd channels in this timeframe.

I've been saying all along that E* wasn't going to just sit there at 'watch' D* add all those new channels, and I got my share of flack from certain posters for saying it as well!
Yes, but I remember the "flak" predicted the future at a 40 point fontsize so it was probably accurate. :cool:

"Superdish" .... part deux? :rolleyes:
No superdish will be needed, just a standard Dish 500.

ALL PROGRAMMING (SD and HD) will be uplinked competely in MPEG4.

Finally MPEG4 works like its supposed to. :D The bandwidth savings are real.

Only time will tell if all this nonsense is worth it or not. After all, its just 'yet another' press release coming from a different direction.
Actually no press release. These comments from Charlie Ergen were said in his opening presentation to his retailers at their annual retailers conference.

Tommorow at noon Dish will be having a earning conference call, I wonder if Charlie will say anything about it.

Actually no press release. These comments from Charlie Ergen were said in his opening presentation to his retailers at their annual retailers conference.

Tommorow at noon Dish will be having a earning conference call, I wonder if Charlie will say anything about it.

Thanks for the clarification, my bad...

But yes, it would make sense that he would say something at the earnings conference call. After all, its been posted elsewhere that the number of new D* HD subs has been increasing significantly, and reflecting favorably in the company's profits. If any of these new D* HD Subs are defectors from E*, well then....Charlie would pretty much be obligated to do something as far as his stockholders are concerned. Especially if any of this reflects negatively on his own company's profits.

Echostar's a tad different than other publicly traded company in that 70something percent of the company is owned by Charlie. Short of breaking the law, Charlie can do pretty much what he wants. He's the majority shareholder and holds. I think I read, 90% of the shares with the votes that count the most.

It's his company. Shareholders can moan and groan but the bottom line for Echostar is, if Charlie's happy everyone else needs to be also.

No superdish will be needed, just a standard Dish 500..

LOL ... not exactly what I meant ... more like "superdish" as in the superdish/HD = complete vaporware episode from yesteryear. ... Some of us have long attention spans. ;) It wouldn't be the first time Charlie has tried to freeze his would be churners. :D

Again, not bashing DirecTV... but any Dish customer who leaves for DirecTV based on their "capacity" announcements is taking a risk that is simply not necessary. Sure, DirecTV may get those channels they announce... but they may not... And it is highly likely that if/when they get them Dish will be right there alongside.

People who like all the sports offerings should be signing with DirecTV absolutely and not listen if Dish says anything about future sports plans for the exact same reason that HD folks should be signing with Dish for what they have now.

I see no reason to believe that either company will have a substantial lead in HD for long without the other responding... DirecTV has been behind in HD for a while now, and is advertising and launching satellites and making a bunch of noise about the future to help keep folks from leaving them!

Dish doesn't need to say anything at all unless and until DirecTV gets more HD than they have... and FYI, this would be true if the fortunes of both companies were reversed.

There was a time, for instance, that DirecTV had UniversalHD and ESPN2HD before Dish... but Dish launched them at some point and has added a bunch more since then to boot! I would not be surprised to see DirecTV add a few HDs before Dish does in the future... but I expect Dish to get them soon thereafter and keep the pace.

Remember, DirecTV is the one playing catch-up here in regards to HD national channels... so it behooves them to advertise and try to keep folks from bolting.

Dish doesn't need to say anything at all unless and until DirecTV gets more HD than they have... .

Well I guess the owner of a multi-billion dollar company thought different. :D

Don't forget that DirectTV has been behind Dish in the Technology game as well. I remember when Dish required all of us to upgrade to 8PKS modules on our 6000's in order to get new HD channels. The old Dish 5000 HD receiver when obsolete. But that gave them the capacity to put 3 channels on a TP instead of just two. Then they made the move to MPEG4 last year. Again, We had to get new hardware and if you didn't, well you did not get to receive the new channels. This has been ongoing since 2003.

DirecTV on the other hand just went with new tech on their HD locals. So nationally, they are still using the same technology that they were using in 2002 (or earlier?). So they have not been able to keep pace with Dish.

But now with the new satellites coming out, the two will be on a much more even playing field. So we may be returning to 2003-5 when E* & D* were pretty much equal in their HD offerings.

E* added 310,000 net new subs in Q1, D* 235,000 net new subs in Q1. I don't quite understand why all the talk about E* subs defecting to D*? Where does that come from?

E* making less per sub profit may have to do with the fact E* operates on a thinner margin than D*, their programming costs are less, they also are providing free HDDVRs where as D* still charge a good amount, so the new sub acquisition cost is much higher. But I will not be surprised if much of the new sub gain was cable HD subs defecting to E* after E* started to offer free HDDVRs. I myself was one of them, switched from E* to Comast two years ago after cable offered free HDDVR, and now am back after E* decided it was time to match cable's HDDVR deal.

Some of you are making too much a big deal of baseball fans or sports fans in general. Just you know the majority of the TV viewers are not big on sports, not to mention out of market games.

Also I don't think all MPEG4 receivers will be HD capable, just don't make any sense, most people still don't watch HDTV. The two new sats appear to be used to transition all E* subs to MPEG4 with new MPEG4 boxes, mostly SD subs.

Of course after the transition, E* will have a lot more space available for HD and other services. The mere fact they said you only need a standard 18" dish should give a clue it is aimed at your existing SD subs who currently use an 18" dish. If it is for the HD subs, dish1000 or something bigger and fancier will not be as much an issue.

So whatever this news had little to do with HD capacity, at least in the short term, IMHO.

E* added 310,000 net new subs in Q1, D* 235,000 net new subs in Q1. I don't quite understand why all the talk about E* subs defecting to D*? Where does that come from?



There may be some defections to D* on the high end but mostly for sports. But then it's been this way for years. If HD is your game why would an E* sub migrate for what D* might be providing in 6 months? If I'm an E* sub and HD is my priority I wait to see what D* offers first before switching. This announcement by Charlie is more to see if he can hold on to many of those people for a while longer while they get in gear for more HD capacity. But we've heard things like this from Charlie before, several times, with nothing to show for it. So we'll see how it comes.

Remember this: D* has given up on the low end market. They want the big dollar spenders with low churn. Sports and HD do this.

E* on the other hand goes for the low end, cheap market. Thus their smaller and cheaper packages. They do have good HD offerings though for those more interested in movies and general interest.

So E* signs up more people because these are people defecting from cable looking for something cheap. D* gains new customers not so much for the same thing as while they do have the cheaper family pack, it doesn't have as many channels in it as the D* cheap package. D* has raised the average spending per sub to $72 I believe their statement said. That's much more then E*.

So D* doesn't mind slower growth if they make more money per sub. E* is going more for volume at lower money per sub.

Both ways are more then fine business plans and while both E* and D* are very similar they market themselves to different segments of the population. Competition and choice are good.

Think of it this way, which would you rather have:
1) 10 million customers spending 75 a month or
2) 15 million customers spending 45 a month?

This is the direction both sat providers are going to, D* with the #1 strat, E* with the #2 strat.

Also I don't think all MPEG4 receivers will be HD capable, I don't know about that one. I would think that Dish would like to standardize on as few STBs as possible. I could easily see all new MPEG4 boxes having HD capability. Perhaps the ATSC tuner would be removed someday to make then cheaper. But I think that Dish likes the idea of HD and DVR fees always being a viable option for their customers.

Plus with the capacity of MPEG4 dish could offer all the HD on just those two new slots. Forget the Dish1000+ stuff.

E* on the other hand goes for the low end, cheap market. Thus their smaller and cheaper packages. They do have good HD offerings though for those more interested in movies and general interest.

I just added HD and an E* 622 HD-DVR a couple of weeks ago.

Comparing the HD programming I am getting with the subset that is on D*, I can safely that E* has two or three times as many HD programs as D*.

Most of the HD programming is on the channels that E* has, but D* does not.

Everyone is so conditioned by names like "A&E" and "TNT" and "National Geographic" that they don't realize that most of the "HD versions of existing cable channels" have almost no HD programming - everything is upconverted from 4x3 SD. Even ESPN-HD and ESPN2-HD have very little HD programming.

Most of the HD programming is on:
- Discovery HD Theater (not news to any AVS reader, but this is undoubtedly a leader of the HD movement - can't wait for the additional channels in a few months)
- HD-Net (and HD-Movies and HD-News) - seeing a shuttle launch in HD is worth your bill for that month
- Voom Channels (not on DirecTV) - these have a boat load of films transferred to HD, as well as an actual Music Concert channel in HD (which is also worth the $20 per month by itself, although, as with all HD channels, there is still a shortage of new programming).

While we're still waiting for FoodTV HD and HGTV HD to have more than a fraction of the programming on the SD equivalents, at least it is all in true HD - and those are not on DirecTV either.

Currently, most of the DirecTV HD seems to be commercials with people saying the words "1080i". :rolleyes:

E* may not be adding a lot of channels this year.

In the investors call, EchoStar CEO Charlie Ergen also said the company might add roughly six more high-def channels this year.

http://www.tvpredictions.com/echo051107.htm

That keeps in line with what has been reported. Dish is working on getting two new satellites in service. When they are operational, they should be able to offer extensive HD service via MPEG4 only. But that likely won't go green until early 2008. I recognize that Dish will be behind D* for a period of time once D* HD utopia lights up. So there will be a period of catch up. The Six new channels will hopefully keep dish attractive during that time.

I secretly hope that Dish ditches Voom and uses those 15 HD channels for more mainstream HD if all the promised channels do materialize.

I agree with you, but Dish owns at least a share of Voom, so that is not likely to happen, CycloneGT.

If the six additional HDs are national channels that will cover 2007 very well IMO. How many more real HDs were planned for later this year? I doubt the Starz suite of HDs are a must.

As far as having all MPEG4 boxes HD capable, absolutely no reason to do that unless the cost of production is very close. Just look at cable, they initially rolled out their digital DVRs that were SD/HD capable two years ago, now with digital simulcast in full swing, SD only digital boxes are rolled out in mass for the majority of analog SD subs. It is bottom line approach. If you have 95% of sub base don't have HD, why give them a box that would cost maybe $50 more to manufacture? Anyone can call to swtich to an HD box if they want. Total waste of resources.

Now DVR functions will be more important because the new MPEG4 DVRs (SD or HD) will certainly avoid any Tivo legal complications, and we all know you can seriously reduce churn with DVRs, it is addictive and once getting used to will be harder to get used to a new and different brand DVR, this will be true for the majority of viewers. Not to mention DVRs can track your viewing habit, provide many new revenue streams, the benefit is even more so than offering HD programming.

That keeps in line with what has been reported. Dish is working on getting two new satellites in service. When they are operational, they should be able to offer extensive HD service via MPEG4 only. But that likely won't go green until early 2008. I recognize that Dish will be behind D* for a period of time once D* HD utopia lights up. So there will be a period of catch up. The Six new channels will hopefully keep dish attractive during that time.


How far behind waits to be seen. D* has promised 100 HD channels by late 2007, yet many of these new channells that D* is depending on to meet its claims, are already releasing announcements themsleves that are claiming a launch of early 2008, so already the timeline is starting to creep.

Even ESPN-HD and ESPN2-HD have very little HD programming.


:confused: :confused: :confused:

ESPN2HD just added over 6 per day (8 hours if you count the First Take repeat).

How far behind waits to be seen. D* has promised 100 HD channels by late 2007, yet many of these new channells that D* is depending on to meet its claims, are already releasing announcements themsleves that are claiming a launch of early 2008, so already the timeline is starting to creep.

true, but just recently with the 6 discovery and three to four starz channels announced for this yearthe 100 still may be there.

true, but just recently with the 6 discovery and three to four starz channels announced for this yearthe 100 still may be there.


7 current HD channels +
2 current premium HD channels +
5 standard HD networks (maybe 4, but I'll say 5) +
5 HD channels E* has that D* don't that D* could get +
2 premium HD channels that E* has that D* don't that D* could get +
5 (estimate) HD channels that neither D* nor E* have but D * could get +
1 premium HD channel that neither D* nor E* have but D* could get +
6 discovery channels that might appear +
4 starz channels that might appear. +
0 channels for Voom because I'm not including that here, but could by adding 15.

the total based on generous estimates:
37 HD channels that have a possibility of showing up on D* in the next few monthes...subject to change as additional knowledge becomes avialable...

37 isn't even close to 50, much less 100...like I said, its doubtful we will see all 100 channels on D* this year. I'm sure we will see them, but not this year. E* has marginally some time to catch up if they choose to do so...but that waits to be seen as well...

While I admire your optimism, you would certainly make me nervous if you were my accountant or my stock broker... :p

I secretly hope that Dish ditches Voom and uses those 15 HD channels for more mainstream HD if all the promised channels do materialize.

I just switched from DirecTV to DISH because of the unique Voom channels. I hope they stick around. D* keeps promising more HD channels by the end of the year, but, whose to say that DISH won't have the same channels as well?

I originally had E* back in 2000, but switched to D* a year later because of the NHL Center Ice package. Been with D* ever since. However, now that E* also has it, plus the Voom channels, I'm back. I'll wait until hockey season in October to see if I'm happy I switched, but for now, I'm glad to see the unique programming that Voom has to offer. ;)

37 isn't even close to 50, much less 100...like I said, its doubtful we will see all 100 channels on D* this year. I'm sure we will see them, but not this year. E* has marginally some time to catch up if they choose to do so...but that waits to be seen as well...


I'll take 37...

D* has promised 100 HD channels by late 2007...
IIRC, D* has promised "to add the capacity for 100 HD channels".
It's highly unlikely that there will be 100 National HD channels by the end of 2007, especially if you don't include Voom.
But I suppose that D* could add 4 national HD channels, and 24 cities of ABC,NBC,CBS and FOX HD, and fulfill their statement... :rolleyes:
In the investors call, EchoStar CEO Charlie Ergen also said the company might add roughly six more high-def channels this year.
He might have said that because he doesn't know of more than 6 new HD channels that will be available this year - not because E* doesn't have the capacity. As I look at 129 and 61.5, I see potentially more space than one transponder's worth.
Last week, representatives of History channel, Weather channel, and NBC/Universal stated that E* would have any/all of their new HD channels soon after the launch of those channels.
Now DVR functions will be more important because the new MPEG4 DVRs (SD or HD) will certainly avoid any Tivo legal complications, and we all know you can seriously reduce churn with DVRs, it is addictive and once getting used to will be harder to get used to a new and different brand DVR, this will be true for the majority of viewers. Not to mention DVRs can track your viewing habit, provide many new revenue streams, the benefit is even more so than offering HD programming.
None of that requires new hardware. A DVR is a hard drive, a processor, and RAM memory (oops, and, of course, a remote control :) ). Any Dish DVR can have any functions - as long as the receiver supports those things (ie HD, MPEG4, multiple tuners, etc). For example, Side-by-Side PIP was developed for the 622 receiver, and then the code was pasted into the 721 receiver's software.
Charlie has already stated that Dish is already working on software changes that would make its existing DVRs compliant with the TiVo decision if that decision is upheld on appeal.

How much national HD capacity will E* actually have once they switch everything to MPEG4?

...Everyone is so conditioned by names like "A&E" and "TNT" and "National Geographic" that they don't realize that most of the "HD versions of existing cable channels" have almost no HD programming - everything is upconverted from 4x3 SD. Even ESPN-HD and ESPN2-HD have very little HD programming...



Yo! Dude!

Every major sports event presented on ESPN or ESPN2 is in HD.

All MLB, NFL, NBA, NASCAR, MLS, more than 160 NCAA basketball games (this year -- 200+ next year), more than 30 games in the NCAA women's basketball tournament, all NCAA Football (except for several games from Hawaii) 22 NCAA Bowl games and more. That is over 700 events this calendar year alone. If that is "very little programming" to you, so be it. The two ESPNs will broadcast more than 7,000 hours of original HD content between its two networks this year -- with even more planned for next year.

So in your fervor for Dish don't belittle HD channels with one significantly innacurate post. ESPN, might have joined the HD party late, but presents a staggering amount of HD content.

There aren't any two networks anywhere which present more original HD content than the ESPNs. In fact, they provide more original HD content in any month than all the VOOM channels or ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, the CW, MNTV and PBS combined.

Just do the math.

Now if that is "very little programming" who precisely (in your opinion) provides a lot of HD programming?

Yo! Dude!

Every major sports event presented on ESPN or ESPN2 is in HD....

None of the UEFA Champions League broadcasts on ESPN2 (considered by most sports fans in the world to be the world's top professional sports competition) were in HD this year (even though feeds were available in HD).


The two ESPNs will broadcast more than 7,000 hours of original HD content between its two networks this year -- with even more planned for next year.

So in your fervor for Dish don't belittle HD channels with one significantly innacurate post. ESPN, might have joined the HD party late, but presents a staggering amount of HD content.

There aren't any two networks anywhere which present more original HD content than the ESPNs. In fact, they provide more original HD content in any month than all the VOOM channels or ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, the CW, MNTV and PBS combined.

Just do the math.

Now if that is "very little programming" who precisely (in your opinion) provides a lot of HD programming?
I'm not sure where "fervor for Dish" came into it - Dish has both HD ESPN channels.

7,000 / 2 / 365 = about 10 hours per day. I find that visually hard to believe, because every time I turn on ESPN or ESPN2 when there is not a major sporting event, it is in 4x3 SD.

These channels, and even more so, A&E HD and TNT HD and Natl Geographic HD are HD "outlets" for occasional HD content. The rest of the time they are showing the same 4x3 SD content as their SD channels.

The full-time HD channels, like Discovery HD and HD-NET, have far more HD value, and adding a bunch of new channels that are HD 10% of the time is not that big of a help.

I do realize that if your NBA team is on ESPN right now, that is important to you. But that doesn't reflect on the fact that their channels are not HD channels, they are HD outlets.

There aren't any two networks anywhere which present more original HD content than the ESPNs.
I'd be willing to bet that HD-Net and HDNet-Movies do.

None of the UEFA Champions League broadcasts on ESPN2 (considered by most sports fans in the world to be the world's top professional sports competition) were in HD this year....

7,000 / 2 / 365 = about 10 hours per day. I find that visually hard to believe, because every time I turn on ESPN or ESPN2 when there is not a major sporting event, it is in 4x3 SD....

I'd be willing to bet that HD-Net and HDNet-Movies do.

(I'll take that bet.)

Is there a problem here? Oh yeah, you honestly believe that most sports fans in the world consider the UEFA Champions League "to be the world's top professional sports competition."

More so than, say the World's Cup? (Which ESPN will be broadcasting in HD, by the way -- and Americans do care about a bit, as long as the U.S, is involved.)

But do you really think more Americans care about even a match between AC Milan and FC Barcelona more than they do any old average NBA or MLB game in mid season? Be serious.

But ESPN is broadcasting in the United States. You want to check those UEFA ratings? Even the NHL beats 'em. ESPN is broadcasting to satisfy tastes of the American sports fan and running UEFA Champions League games in HD instead of, say, the NBA, NFL, MLB, NASCAR, or hundreds of college games would be stupid from a business standpoint.

Now take your time. Read my post carefully.

Remember, I said original content.

I have enjoyed HD Net for years, but for original content ESPN has it beaten badly. Samed with the Voom Channels or Discovery or anyone else.

So I will take your bet.

Just because ESPN/ESPN2 doesn't carry your particular sport in HD (which very few in this country care about in the slightest) is no reason to trash it with illogical and untrue statements.

I repeat: show me another pair of networks which broadcast 10 hours of orignal HD content a day.

(A hint: NBC probably comes closest, with Today, Nightly News, Tonight, Conan, and an average of about two hours a night in prime time -- 7 1/2 hours total.)

Is there a problem here? Oh yeah, you honestly believe that most sports fans in the world consider the UEFA Champions League "to be the world's top professional sports competition."

More so than, say the World's Cup? (Which ESPN will be broadcasting in HD, by the way -- and Americans do care about a bit, as long as the U.S, is involved.)

The World Cup (which was last summer, by the way) is an Amateur event, like the Olympics.

But, you are being "pedantic" (look it up). None of your arguments have anything to do with my original post.

I'm not sure how you define "original" programming (it's probably as difficult to determine as whether Toyota is an "American" car). But however you define it, it is irrelevant to what we are talking about - whether the programming is HD. HD-Net has only HD programs - including live stuff like the Space Shuttle launches, and recorded programs like Alison Krauss and Union Station Live.

I have yet to tune to A&E HD or Natl Geographic HD and see HD programming. Perhaps they occasionally do, and it happens to be when I am watching something else.

But the point is that counting such channels as "HD" is not only somewhat false advertising, it is also not something to be fervently waiting for, either.

What we want is more HD programs - not more channels that have "HD" in the title.

In television, "original" means not a repeat.

Is that so hard to understand? (If it is, you could look it up.)

And if you mean I am being too concerned with formal rules or accuracy, you are correct.

Because you used lots of ideas you disguised as facts and then discounted any reality.

HD Net has only HD programs, correct (and I suspect I have been watching it far longer than you.) But most of them are repeats. They are often wonderful programs, but again, they are repeated and repeated fairly often.

Now just because you perhaps have not seen a program on HDNet or Discovery or a movie channel doesn't mean it is original programming.

Perhaps you should check a schedule and then you might find out when one of the channels which annoy you so much is broadcasting true HD material.

Oh, and sorry about missing the year on the World Cup. (And since when did pros not participate in the World Cup? Beckham is an amateur? Pele was an amateur?
And pros appear in the Olympics as well -- the basketball teams, tennis players, baseball players and many, many others.)

Sorry I am being pedantic again. Being as accurate as possible is important -- unless, as in your case, the facts counter your strongly-held opinions.

A key element in your post -- because ESPN2 doesn't show your European soccer games in HD it isn't a worthwhile HD channel -- is beyond silly.

That original post claimed ESPN/ESPN2 was worthless. I have shown they broadcast more original (oops -- non repeated) programming than any other network.

Your arguments (whether they be about the ESPNs, the most popular professional sports in the world or whether the Olympics and World Cup are amateur events) are mindless, factually wrong and totally ignorant about television.

(Look it up.)


The World Cup (which was last summer, by the way) is an Amateur event, like the Olympics.

But, you are being "pedantic" (look it up). None of your arguments have anything to do with my original post.

I'm not sure how you define "original" programming (it's probably as difficult to determine as whether Toyota is an "American" car). But however you define it, it is irrelevant to what we are talking about - whether the programming is HD. HD-Net has only HD programs - including live stuff like the Space Shuttle launches, and recorded programs like Alison Krauss and Union Station Live.

I have yet to tune to A&E HD or Natl Geographic HD and see HD programming. Perhaps they occasionally do, and it happens to be when I am watching something else.

But the point is that counting such channels as "HD" is not only somewhat false advertising, it is also not something to be fervently waiting for, either.

What we want is more HD programs - not more channels that have "HD" in the title.

A key element in your post -- because ESPN2 doesn't show your European soccer games in HD it isn't a worthwhile HD channel -- is beyond silly.

That original post claimed ESPN/ESPN2 was worthless. I have shown they broadcast more original (oops -- non repeated) programming than any other network.
My original post did not claim "ESPN/ESPN2 was worthless".

I also did not say "because ESPN2 doesn't show UEFA soccer in HD it isn't a worthwhile HD channel".

I said (on same page as your remarks): Even ESPN-HD and ESPN2-HD have very little HD programming...

I never said anything about "worthwhile", I was only talking about quantity.

you then claimed:
Every major sports event presented on ESPN or ESPN2 is in HD.

And I used the example of UEFA Champions League to show that statement is not true. I assumed not everyone is familiar with the tournament, so I mentioned that - world-wide - it is the most presitigious professional sports event. (By the way, World Cup and Olympics do not pay the players, so they are amateur.)

UEFA Champions League is shown in HD by Sky Sports UK, so the feeds are available in HD. So, ESPN only shows some major sports events in HD and others it does not.

Your figures claim 10 hours per day. If true, that means 14 hours is SD. By simple match, ESPN-HD and ESPN2-HD are SD channels that show some HD.

My original point was:
most of the "HD versions of existing cable channels" have almost no HD programming - everything is upconverted from 4x3 SD.

To elaborate on that, everyone is eagerly anticipating more cable channels announcing what they call "HD channels" and what I am saying is that doesn't mean more HD programming, and very likely not very much additional HD programming. The Weather Channel looks like the exception - since they broadcast live (or recent) programming most of the time, then their HD version should be mostly or all HD programming.

How much national HD capacity will E* actually have once they switch everything to MPEG4?
I just had an opportunity to listen to a recording of Charlie's actual remarks a week ago.
E* is launching two satellites by the end of the year.
In terms of HD content, those satellites will provide the capacity for:

- 100 cities' HD local channels (ABC,CBS,NBC,FOX) (85$ of households)

- 200 National HD channels

...None of that requires new hardware. A DVR is a hard drive, a processor, and RAM memory (oops, and, of course, a remote control :) ). Any Dish DVR can have any functions - as long as the receiver supports those things (ie HD, MPEG4, multiple tuners, etc). For example, Side-by-Side PIP was developed for the 622 receiver, and then the code was pasted into the 721 receiver's software.
Charlie has already stated that Dish is already working on software changes that would make its existing DVRs compliant with the TiVo decision if that decision is upheld on appeal.

I wasn't talking about the 622 boxes at all, but the MPEG4 boxes to replace all old MPEG2 boxes for all 13 million E* subs. I said DVR functions in those boxes will be a higher priority than HD capability.

Oh yeah, you honestly believe that most sports fans in the world consider the UEFA Champions League "to be the world's top professional sports competition."
He would probably be right. Don't be brainwashed by the NFL. NFL is only popular in the States. The rest of the WORLD plays soccer and please don't judge anything by our american JV MLS teams. They look like junior high school teams next to teams like Barcelona or Real Madrid. :rolleyes:

He would probably be right. Don't be brainwashed by the NFL. NFL is only popular in the States. The rest of the WORLD plays soccer and please don't judge anything by our american JV MLS teams. They look like junior high school teams next to teams like Barcelona or Real Madrid. :rolleyes:

I think its a perceived value thing. Some think that whatever they are willing to pay out the nose for automatically has value, without ever considering much else...

He would probably be right. Don't be brainwashed by the NFL. NFL is only popular in the States. The rest of the WORLD plays soccer and please don't judge anything by our american JV MLS teams. They look like junior high school teams next to teams like Barcelona or Real Madrid. :rolleyes:


And don't be brainwashed by European soccer fans.

I have seen no evidence that a majority of South American or Asian sports fans would agree that the UEFA provides the most popular professional sports events in the world.

And there are far more Asian/South American sports fans than in Europe.

And aside from that, why in the world would ESPN/ESPN2 worry about what the world thinks? They are programming, at least in the United States, the American tastes.

So why should the folks in Bristol care at all what people on Barcelona, Beirut, Buenos Aires or Bangkok think is popular? They do quite well satisfying fans in Baltimore, Bangor and Bakersfield.

And don't be brainwashed by European soccer fans.

I have seen no evidence that a majority of South American or Asian sports fans would agree that the UEFA provides the most popular professional sports events in the world.

And there are far more Asian/South American sports fans than in Europe.

And aside from that, why in the world would ESPN/ESPN2 worry about what the world thinks? They are programming, at least in the United States, the American tastes.

So why should the folks in Bristol care at all what people on Barcelona, Beirut, Buenos Aires or Bangkok think is popular? They do quite well satisfying fans in Baltimore, Bangor and Bakersfield.
I do not have to be brainwashed by Eurosoccer fans, Ive watched chamions league and la Liga myself. Im not sure just what sport you think is more popular than soccer but Id sure like to hear it. I mean we all know what a hot commodity NFL europe is :rolleyes:

IIRC, D* has promised "to add the capacity for 100 HD channels".
It's highly unlikely that there will be 100 National HD channels by the end of 2007, especially if you don't include Voom.
But I suppose that D* could add 4 national HD channels, and 24 cities of ABC,NBC,CBS and FOX HD, and fulfill their statement... :rolleyes:
Pretty much everything you said here is untrue.

- D* promised a total capacity of 150 national channels - 100 of which would be by the end of 2007.

- D* specifically mentioned national channels - not locals.

I do not have to be brainwashed by Eurosoccer fans, Ive watched chamions league and la Liga myself. Im not sure just what sport you think is more popular than soccer but Id sure like to hear it. I mean we all know what a hot commodity NFL europe is :rolleyes:

I never said soccer wasn't the most popular sport in the world.

I simply questioned the bald assertion by A_Dude that UEFA was the most popular professional sporting event in the world.

(Not that being the most popular sporting event in the world should have much bearing on what ESPN/ESPN2 shows in HD to American sports fans.)

And whether you have watched something yourself also has no bearing on what is the most popular sport, either in the U.S., Europe, or the world.

The plain truth is that soccer gets miniscule ratings in the United States. That is an undeniable fact. Fans may wish that ESPN or anyone provide massive coverage and then all the American sports fans will suddenly realize how ignorant they are and become passionate soccer fans, too. But that is a different question. And an effort that has been attempted time and again, dating back to the NASL in the 70s, which for several years filled stadiums and was force fed to the U.S. via ABC TV -- to no avail (and very small ratings).

As to what sports are more popular in the United States than soccer (based on TV ratings), let's try: NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, NASCAR, college football men's college basketball, women's college basketball, golf, X-games, the Olympics, IRL, Little League baseball championships, the NCAA college baseball World Series, the NFL Draft, and I am sure there are more.

As to what sports are more popular in the United States than soccer (based on TV ratings), let's try: NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, NASCAR, college football men's college basketball, women's college basketball, golf, X-games, the Olympics, IRL, Little League baseball championships, the NCAA college baseball World Series, the NFL Draft, and I am sure there are more.

Not.

TV Ratings in the USA for the World Cup Final were roughly equivalent to World Series and Final Four.

But, the popularity of soccer is off-topic for this thread, again I was merely demonstrating that ESPN is not showing everything in HD that it could show. And there are many complaints here in AVS about what they do when the program is actually in HD - see:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=844422

(And, this morning, I tuned to ESPN-HD and the poker was not in HD.)

Instead, I put on a DVR recording from last night of "Guys and Dolls" in HD on Voom Family HD (musical starring Frank Sinatra and Marlon Brando). The film is over 50 years, so is it therefore not "original" HD programming ? I can't rent or buy it in HD.

I'm certainly not trying to bash ESPN - I watch the MLS match on ESPN2-HD almost every week.

The point is simply that labeling a channel "HD" in the title is not enough - and adding channels to your lineup with "HD" in their titles may not be as significant as it looks at first glance.

People buy HDTV's.... and the picture is not all that much better than their old TV... then a friend comes over, and says "you have to get some HD channels !". So, they get A&E HD and Natl Geographic HD... and the picture is still not much better than before...

Pretty much everything you said here [about D* HD claims] is untrue. "IIRC" means "If I Recall Correctly". If your statement is accurate, then I did not recall correctly. To make up for it, you can have Vinnie's watch. ;)

HEY! Did you guys know that E* plans on lauching two additional satellite to hopefully keep up with D* in playing the capacity game? :D :D :D

I just had an opportunity to listen to a recording of Charlie's actual remarks a week ago.
E* is launching two satellites by the end of the year.
In terms of HD content, those satellites will provide the capacity for:

- 100 cities' HD local channels (ABC,CBS,NBC,FOX) (85$ of households)

- 200 National HD channels
Where will the bandwidth come from for the 200 national channels? That is a lot of transponders. Are they going to be switching to Ka-Band too?

Where will the bandwidth come from for the 200 national channels? That is a lot of transponders. Are they going to be switching to Ka-Band too?


The orignal post by A-Dude was inaccurate. Here was what they said thanks to Scott at Satelliteguys.....

On these two satellites they will be able to offer the following:
200 LIL Cities in Standard Definion
HD Locals to 100 Cities
1000 Stadard Definition Channels
200 International Channels.

HEY! Did you guys know that E* plans on lauching two additional satellite to hopefully keep up with D* in playing the capacity game? :D :D :D
LOL - I was getting ready to post something, but I couldn't think of anything clever to say.

LOL - I was getting ready to post something, but I couldn't think of anything clever to say.

You did manage to say something but unfortunately was totally off mark:

Pretty much everything you said here is untrue.

- D* promised a total capacity of 150 national channels - 100 of which would be by the end of 2007.

- D* specifically mentioned national channels - not locals.

What he said was absolutely true, by the end of 2007 there will not be 100 national HD channels, much less 150. For D* to fufill their committment, they may have to use HD LIL to fill the void. If they don't then there will not be 100 HD nationals on D* by the end of 2007 no matter what capacity they have, you can't carry things that don't exist. That was his point.

What you did was to point out the obvious that everybody knew about, yet missed his point, so I'd say you made the right move not saying anything in the last post.

You did manage to say something but unfortunately was totally off mark:



What he said was absolutely true, by the end of 2007 there will not be 100 national HD channels, much less 150. For D* to fufill their committment, they may have to use HD LIL to fill the void. If they don't then there will not be 100 HD nationals on D* by the end of 2007 no matter what capacity they have, you can't carry things that don't exist. That was his point.

What you did was to point out the obvious that everybody knew about, yet missed his point, so I'd say you made the right move not saying anything in the last post.
No, what I said was true. That's what D* promised. I didn't make any claims they would meet their goal. Whether it happens or not, that's what they claim they'll do.

They specifically said the 100 channels will be national channels in addition to the LIL markets that will go up this year. Now, whether they'll count RSNs, NFl Sunday Ticket Channels and PPV in that 100 remains to be seen.

Whether they make it or not, the data I gave is what was promised.

The fact is, the capacity is for 150 national channels, not 100 as was asserted in the post I replied to. 100 national channels were promised by the end of the year IN ADDITION to the LIL markets scheduled to go up, not including them. I didn't state anything that has proven to be incorrect (yet) and is out of the mouths of the folks at D*. What we believe will happen doesn't change what D* has promised.

We can't change that fact just because we think they won't meet their goals.

...The fact is, the capacity is for 150 national channels, not 100 as was asserted in the post I replied to. ...

He was talking about this year so 100 national HDs was correct, and his assertion that it can not be done since there will not be 100 national HDs exist by the end of 2007.

I did not mean your information was wrong, but attacking him was wrong.

The orignal post by A-Dude was inaccurate. Here was what they said thanks to Scott at Satelliteguys.....

On these two satellites they will be able to offer the following:
200 LIL Cities in Standard Definion
HD Locals to 100 Cities
1000 Stadard Definition Channels
200 International Channels.

Sorry, your quote of Scott is incomplete. :)

Scott's post says: On these two satellites they will be able to offer the following:
200 LIL Cities in Standard Definion
HD Locals to 100 Cities
200 National HD Channels
1000 Standard Definition Channels
200 International Channels.


But in any event, my post was taken from listening to a recording of Charlie's remarks.

If you go to Satelliteguys, you can listen to the remarks.

200 National HD Channels

... plus all the above....

PS This site is massively prejudiced against Charlie, isn't it ??

Sorry A-Dude, but Scott must have edited his original post early on (or I some how missed 1 line in the middle of 50+) because I posted his entire excerpt on a local forum shortly after he posted it. And rather than trying to locate Scott's tread this time around I just grabbed what I previously cut and pasted and started a thread here. And that original posting made no mention of 200HD channels.

And it's funny because on our local forum that is one thing people mentioned, there is no mention of national HD channels.

Sorry for any confusion.

Sorry, your quote of Scott is incomplete. :)

Scott's post says:

But in any event, my post was taken from listening to a recording of Charlie's remarks.

If you go to Satelliteguys, you can listen to the remarks.

200 National HD Channels

...............

So how/where do they get that much bandwidth?? Ka-Band??? HDlite squared?

So how/where do they get that much bandwidth?? Ka-Band??? HDlite squared?

Launching 2 new satellites by the end of the year that will provide an entirely new DBS service.

People have noticed that FCC very recently approved what might be called "reverse DBS" - broadcasting on the frequencies usually used for uplinking, while uplinking on the frequencies usually used for broadcasting.

I did not mean your information was wrong, but attacking him was wrong.
Sorry if I was antagonistic. We just have too many people asserting so-called "facts" as "truth". When that happens, we have weeks of people believing incorrect information. On a subject as heated as D* or E*, we get too many people who are anti one or the other spouting off their versions of truth. The problem is, not all of those assertions are innocent.

Launching 2 new satellites by the end of the year that will provide an entirely new DBS service.

People have noticed that FCC very recently approved what might be called "reverse DBS" - broadcasting on the frequencies usually used for uplinking, while uplinking on the frequencies usually used for broadcasting.

Understood. However I also did not read the 200 national HDs claim. Are you sure Charlie said it? If so sounded almost to me he was trying to match the amount of hot air D* has been pumping lately.

Because this simply does not make economic sense. Why spend all the money sending two new sats and completely duplicate all the current E* programming in MPEG4? What will they do with the existing bandwidth once the transition to MPEG4 is complete? Not that he can find some 1,000 new SDs, 200 new LIL markets, and another 200 new HDs out there to fill the vacated bandwidth with.

It is just not his style when it comes to upgrading existing subs. The only chance that can happen is if like D* there are two birds already paid for and in orbit for some other services but they suddenly decided to scrap that plan so you have two unused birds might as well do something with them rather have them drifting in space.

What is going to happen with old DBS orbital slots has not been revealed by E*.

But anyone who has compared an MPEG4 video with MPEG2 of the same material, and then examined the filesize realizes that there are huge bandwidth savings.

By starting a parallel service entirely in MPEG4, they can put all new subs there, and put all current HD customers there, and then give incentives to move, while keeping the old service going for those who don't want HD and don't want any new channels (cf my parents and in-laws).

PS The two satellites in question were ordered some time ago, and have scheduled launch dates in 2007.

What is going to happen with old DBS orbital slots has not been revealed by E*.

But anyone who has compared an MPEG4 video with MPEG2 of the same material, and then examined the filesize realizes that there are huge bandwidth savings.

By starting a parallel service entirely in MPEG4, they can put all new subs there, and put all current HD customers there, and then give incentives to move, while keeping the old service going for those who don't want HD and don't want any new channels (cf my parents and in-laws).

PS The two satellites in question were ordered some time ago, and have scheduled launch dates in 2007.

I understand what you are trying to explain, but it is not in Charlie's nature to waste his resources in such a fashion, even D* did not go that far, they only did something slightly similar with HD LILs because the two birds intended for internet service (or something else I could be wrong) had their plan scrapped, so they had those two birds in the sky suddenly available for HD LILs.

Charlie may have changed his plan for these two new sats, but it makes no sense to completely duplicate the service, because it does not offer any incentive for people to switch, as you said those who don't care much will not switch just because it is MPEG4. And those who like new HDs and other new services can easily use the existing MPEG4/MPEG2 combo boxes such as a 622 to get both the exsiting channels on the old birds and new channels on the two new birds.

The only reason to duplicate ALL channels in MPEG4 on the two new birds is to switch ALL subs to MPEG4, so the old bandwidth can be vacated for more channels.

What is going to happen with old DBS orbital slots has not been revealed by E*.

But anyone who has compared an MPEG4 video with MPEG2 of the same material, and then examined the filesize realizes that there are huge bandwidth savings.

By starting a parallel service entirely in MPEG4, they can put all new subs there, and put all current HD customers there, and then give incentives to move, while keeping the old service going for those who don't want HD and don't want any new channels (cf my parents and in-laws).

PS The two satellites in question were ordered some time ago, and have scheduled launch dates in 2007.

Just post reliable references to your information and put this endless speculation to rest, ok? sheez...

a newer member of the forum dissing a moderator and making such bold claims should expect to be challenged. So with all due respect, please share your insights...

Look, I too make a lot of bold claims so I'm not throwing stones here, but this is just plain way out there...so please, enlighten us a little.

What is going to happen with old DBS orbital slots has not been revealed by E*.

But anyone who has compared an MPEG4 video with MPEG2 of the same material, and then examined the filesize realizes that there are huge bandwidth savings.

By starting a parallel service entirely in MPEG4, they can put all new subs there, and put all current HD customers there, and then give incentives to move, while keeping the old service going for those who don't want HD and don't want any new channels (cf my parents and in-laws).

PS The two satellites in question were ordered some time ago, and have scheduled launch dates in 2007.


If E* has extra sats, they can lease the space to corporations and government uses. Could be a bigger money maker than the TV subs. Many sat companies do this and lease the bandwidth to bigger fish. The fact that they will move (eventually) all their subs to MPeg4 is exciting especially broadcasting all channels in HD then downgrading to SD (much better SD quality).

As a sports fan, I wish they carried YES channel and YESHD or I would be tempted to leave D*.

Regarding what may seem like(and could very well be), the duplication of having "extra" satellites, these sats don't last forever, and in fact I believe there are, one for sure - 129, a few that are nearing the end of their life cycles so what may seem like duplication may just be the normal course of replacing old equipment with new. If you look through 10K reports for a company like Echostar they'll list what condition and the expected life of the satellites that are in service, 129 has been in a weak state for some time now.

Regarding what may seem like(and could very well be), the duplication of having "extra" satellites, these sats don't last forever, and in fact I believe there are, one for sure - 129, a few that are nearing the end of their life cycles so what may seem like duplication may just be the normal course of replacing old equipment with new. If you look through 10K reports for a company like Echostar they'll list what condition and the expected life of the satellites that are in service, 129 has been in a weak state for some time now.

To the contrary, backup has nothing to do with programming duplication, in fact if the two sats are to duplicate the programming in MPEG4, they can no longer be backups because if they do, the MPEG4 subs will lose their programming. Backup means spare sat capacity that can be used in case the main sat bites the dust. If they are used for other services, then their spare capacity is taken away for those services, not available for backup.

So this theory does not fly either.

The two new sats were planned for backup, now it appears they have a little change of plan, want to use them for all new MPEG4 programming, and the only rationale behind it would be to trasition all subs to MPEG4, otherwise keeping 90% of the subs on all-MPEG2 programming and other 10% on all-MPEG4 programming is a total waste of resources.

To the contrary, backup has nothing to do with programming duplication, in fact if the two sats are to duplicate the programming in MPEG4, they can no longer be backups because if they do, the MPEG4 subs will lose their programming. Backup means spare sat capacity that can be used in case the main sat bites the dust. If they are used for other services, then their spare capacity is taken away for those services, not available for backup.

So this theory does not fly either.

The two new sats were planned for backup, now it appears they have a little change of plan, want to use them for all new MPEG4 programming, and the only rationale behind it would be to trasition all subs to MPEG4, otherwise keeping 90% of the subs on all-MPEG2 programming and other 10% on all-MPEG4 programming is a total waste of resources.
Backups? I didn't say anything about backups, I was talking about replacements. Did Dish say they were originally to be used as backups? I guess I'm going to have to re-read the posts in this thread, I lost interest when it went off on the soccer tangent.

Without seeing the details, my guess is that they are moving everyone to MPEG4, using new fresh birds, and the older birds will be retired, as I noted earlier, 129 has been crippled for at least a year now so whatever is on that bird is going to have to go somewhere. I'm sure most of us have seen the drop in signal strength as 129 wobbles out of position, and from what I understand, that condition can only get worse.

The two new sats were planned for backup, now it appears they have a little change of plan, want to use them for all new MPEG4 programming, and the only rationale behind it would be to trasition all subs to MPEG4, otherwise keeping 90% of the subs on all-MPEG2 programming and other 10% on all-MPEG4 programming is a total waste of resources.


I remember back not long ago when someone had declaired E* HD 'dead', and I had stated that E* could very easily re-purpose those satellites in order to stay competitive in HD and the proclaimed 'death notice' was grossly premature. Needless to say I was rewarded for my forsight with namecalling and basic trashtalk. I guess the only real way one can truly validate a forward-looking statement is by the outcome... ;)

Backups? I didn't say anything about backups, I was talking about replacements. Did Dish say they were originally to be used as backups? I guess I'm going to have to re-read the posts in this thread, I lost interest when it went off on the soccer tangent.

Without seeing the details, my guess is that they are moving everyone to MPEG4, using new fresh birds, and the older birds will be retired, as I noted earlier, 129 has been crippled for at least a year now so whatever is on that bird is going to have to go somewhere. I'm sure most of us have seen the drop in signal strength as 129 wobbles out of position, and from what I understand, that condition can only get worse.

Alright, backup or replacement, regardless, we should be able to agree they are not there to provide a complete duplicate E* service so half of the subs can be on the MPEG2 side and the other half on the MPEG4 side.

If the new sats are to provide all E* channels in MPEG4, the only purpose of that is to move ALL E* subs to MPEG4, that means free basic MPEG4 boxes for all existing SD subs.

Alright, backup or replacement, regardless, we should be able to agree they are not there to provide a complete duplicate E* service so half of the subs can be on the MPEG2 side and the other half on the MPEG4 side.

If the new sats are to provide all E* channels in MPEG4, the only purpose of that is to move ALL E* subs to MPEG4, that means free basic MPEG4 boxes for all existing SD subs.
We agree, I wouldn't think the plan would be to provide a duplicate service, possibly during a transition period, but long term? No, I don't see that as a long term goal.

Let me speculate. They are duplicating their service now with the intent that all new subs will use the new satellites with MPEG4. Soon thereafter the E* high price subscribers that have the 250 channel package will be given, or sold cheaply, new equipment to switch them over to MPEG4 new service. Then they can shut off half of their MPEG2 channels. They can then work down the ladder switching their 120 channel package subscribers and so on.

I am wildly speculating but this is a possible scenario.

Rick R

I remember back not long ago when someone had declaired E* HD 'dead', and I had stated that E* could very easily re-purpose those satellites in order to stay competitive in HD and the proclaimed 'death notice' was grossly premature. Needless to say I was rewarded for my forsight with namecalling and basic trashtalk. I guess the only real way one can truly validate a forward-looking statement is by the outcome... ;)

It's always been amazing to me how people make their equipment purchases into sporting events, and even more amazing how Forums will end up as being supporters of one "team" or another.

It's odd to me that a site dedicated to the proposition that "1240 is way better than 1220, because it is a bigger number" would be so D*-centric, considering that E* has always been ahead in technology, and E* Engineering Department has always been way more communicative with the customers. There are several dozen E* customers who are in regular email contact with E* engineering, while I have never heard of one D* customer who is. Last night, E* had another "Tech Forum" on Dish Network channel 101 where they answered technical questions from customers by phone and email. Very few corporations do such things.

PS Any of the info I get is from Satelliteguys Forum (btw it's dot US not dot COM), where you can listen to an MP3 of Charlie's remarks about the new MPEG4 satellite service.

It's always been amazing to me how people make their equipment purchases into sporting events, and even more amazing how Forums will end up as being supporters of one "team" or another.

Thats because too your average D* sub, it IS a sporting event. Everything is a sporting event. They don't choose their provider on the basis of cost, content, or even quality...its all about being able to pay the couple of hundred dollars extra for the sporting events. The end result, if you challenge their choice of provider, it becomes another sporting event! Like they say, "give a four year old a hammer and everything looks like a nail."

And yes, Satguys is an excellent source of information. But paraphrasing anything Charlie says in your own posts without attribution? Well...there is not enough I can say about that one... :D

Thats because too your average D* sub, it IS a sporting event. Everything is a sporting event. They don't choose their provider on the basis of cost, content, or even quality...its all about being able to pay the couple of hundred dollars extra for the sporting events. The end result, if you challenge their choice of provider, it becomes another sporting event! Like they say, "give a four year old a hammer and everything looks like a nail."


I must not be an average D* sub then.
I choose DirecTV over cable because it is cheaper and has more channels for that cheaper price.
I choose DirecTV over Dish because of Sunday Ticket and price/programming is very similar (i.e. Dish doesn't offer anything that I *must have* over DirecTV).

And for those that are "average" in your mind, why is it wrong for them to want to get sports? Just because you don't value it doesn't mean that millions of others also don't value it.

I must not be an average D* sub then.
I choose DirecTV over cable because it is cheaper and has more channels for that cheaper price.
I choose DirecTV over Dish because of Sunday Ticket and price/programming is very similar (i.e. Dish doesn't offer anything that I *must have* over DirecTV).

Um...Sorry, but that sounds pretty much like my definition of 'average' to me...

And for those that are "average" in your mind, why is it wrong for them to want to get sports? Just because you don't value it doesn't mean that millions of others also don't value it.

I'm not saying that its wrong, I'm just saying "thats how it is."

The point here is there is nothing wrong if you love sports and D* is the way to go for HD sports, there is something strange going on with you if you buy into D* only for its promised future HD offering that is not here today.

He would probably be right. Don't be brainwashed by the NFL. NFL is only popular in the States. The rest of the WORLD plays soccer and please don't judge anything by our american JV MLS teams. They look like junior high school teams next to teams like Barcelona or Real Madrid. :rolleyes:

Actually, the rest of the world plays football (which Americans call soccer). The rest of the world calls our football American football. As for comparing MLS with the rest of the world's football leagues, I liken MLS to somewhere in between the English 'League Championship' division and the English 'League One' (and I think I am being pretty generous to MLS :) ).

I do agree with fredfa that ESPN HD and ESPN 2 HD have a great deal of original Sports programming in HD. Quite simply, they cater to the majority of the American public that want to see American Football (be it pro or college), NBA, Baseball, etc... I think they are doing an extremely good job at this.

Having said that, I too would love to see the UEFA Champions League games (as well as other European leagues like the EPL) on ESPN HD (or whatever channel).

The point here is there is nothing wrong if you love sports and D* is the way to go for HD sports, there is something strange going on with you if you buy into D* only for its promised future HD offering that is not here today.

perfect summary

I must not be an average D* sub then.
I choose DirecTV over cable because it is cheaper and has more channels for that cheaper price.
I choose DirecTV over Dish because of Sunday Ticket and price/programming is very similar (i.e. Dish doesn't offer anything that I *must have* over DirecTV).

And for those that are "average" in your mind, why is it wrong for them to want to get sports? Just because you don't value it doesn't mean that millions of others also don't value it.

Actually, the owner of Dish, Charlie Ergen, answers questions on a Dish channel several times a year. On more than one occasion, callers have asked "So I'd really like to have Sunday Ticket - when are you going to have it?" and Charlie's response always is "Sunday Ticket is exclusive to DirecTV, and if you really want it, you should subscribe to DirecTV".

(I was referring more to Forum posters than subscribers - I know several DirecTV subscribers who have never posted to a Forum in their life.)

If that is "very little programming" to you, so be it. The two ESPNs will broadcast more than 7,000 hours of original HD content between its two networks this year -- with even more planned for next year.
...
There aren't any two networks anywhere which present more original HD content than the ESPNs.
I'm getting more of a grasp on this issue now.

I'd have to say that outside of movies (which admittedly is an important segment, especially to me), 60% of the remaining content that is labeled "HD" is just talking heads in a studio.

For example, it is great that the NBC News with Brian Williams (which we were already watching in SD) is now in HD. But, outside of Brian and the other talking heads in the studio, most of it is not HD. Most HD shows consist of talking heads in a studio with an HD camera, followed by SD footage with graphics on either side of the 4x3 part.

Just now, I checked ESPN2-HD which has boxing in 4x3 SD. But ESPN-HD has an HD program... or is it? Baseball Tonight is talking heads in a psychedelic colored studio (as all the HD studios :) ) with an HD camera. They show highlights, and a minority of the highlights are in HD, most are 4x3 SD.

National Geographic HD has some documentaries that consist of interviewing someone with an HD camera about events a few years ago. In between interview segments are SD footage of the actual events, that is matted to be 16x9 (and thereby not even 480 resolution).

Both the Baseball Tonight and the Natl Geographic show get to say "HD" in the listings.

I'm not blaming anyone - obviously there is not a lot of HD content out there. But now I know where the "7,000 hours of original HD content" math is derived - by shooting talking heads with an HD camera (which, of course, is the sort of programming which least benefits from HD). Clearly, many of the channels are doing this - it's easier and cheaper to shoot talking heads in a studio in HD than to take the camera to events (as is done by HD-News channel, btw).

Having said that, I too would love to see the UEFA Champions League games....on ESPN HD (or whatever channel).The UEFA Champions League games are shown on ESPN Deportes in SD.

Again, not bashing DirecTV... but any Dish customer who leaves for DirecTV based on their "capacity" announcements is taking a risk that is simply not necessary. Sure, DirecTV may get those channels they announce... but they may not...
Wrong.

Short of a satellite issue, they will have all the HD they say they will.

Wrong.

Short of a satellite issue, they will have all the HD they say they will.

I'm sure they will, but will they have it WHEN they say they will?

Any Dish customer who leaves for DirecTV based on their "capacity" announcements may not be taking a huge 'risk' in the longer term, but they definitely have more to lose than anything to gain in the interim.

I have no doubt D* will become somewhat competitive again by years again, but the numbers, the probabilities, and the track record here do not support their magnificient claims beyond just simply being more competetive in the HD market than they are now...

Wrong.

Short of a satellite issue, they will have all the HD they say they will.

Only if those channels exist in HD. Right now there simply isn't enough HD to fill DirecTV's proposed capacity... so even if the launches go off without a hitch, there may very well not be anywhere near that level of HD content in existence by the end of this year.

It would be poor judgment for someone to sign up with DirecTV just based on these promises. If you like DirecTV better now, then go for it and I wouldn't argue one bit... but if you sign up just because of a promise for a future that may or may not happen this year... that's a poor decision.

Only if those channels exist in HD. Right now there simply isn't enough HD to fill DirecTV's proposed capacity...
You need to read all the existing topics on this subject; it's been hashed over for months. They will have more HD than anyone else, sat issues notwithstanding.

Ok, a quick search turned up this topic, which covers the basics, there may be better topic still out there:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=826494

I'm sure they will, but will they have it WHEN they say they will?

Any Dish customer who leaves for DirecTV based on their "capacity" announcements may not be taking a huge 'risk' in the longer term, but they definitely have more to lose than anything to gain in the interim.

I have no doubt D* will become somewhat competitive again by years again, but the numbers, the probabilities, and the track record here do not support their magnificient claims beyond just simply being more competetive in the HD market than they are now...You keep saying this, over the last few months. You will be proven wrong.

Short of a satellite issue...

...sat issues notwithstanding.
Isn’t it interesting we always seem to have at least one caveat with different providers? E* is supposed to launch two new sats by years end, however...

Shoulda, coulda, woulda, if, when, maybe, likely, possibly...

the only reason to switch from e* to d* now, before they have their new sats up and broadcasting all the new promised hd channels is for mlb or nfl ticket.

i love sports but i won't pay hundreds of dollars to watch teams i don't care about. nfl ticket is more appealing than mlb, but last i checked the cost was way too much. i can get 5 free games a week including my 2 favorite teams. why spend $20.00 a weekend and be glued to your set all day sunday to get your moneys worth. if the price dropped to around $100 for nfl ticket i think they would get more revenue as people like me would think it would be worth it.

You keep saying this, over the last few months. You will be proven wrong.

And to be quite honest with you, I hope I am wrong. Nothing would make me happier than more HD, I don't care who is providing it. But if I am going to be setting myself up for failure here, lets be very, very clear on exactly what I'm going to be wrong about!

D* says they will have 100 National HD channels by the end of the year, I say it sounds good...but right now they do not, and they have a lot to prove first.

I say that if their 100 National HD channels consists of...say...50 channels mirrored to east and west coast feeds, thats not 100 channels. Thats 50 channels mirrored.

And most importantly, if their 100 National HD channels consists of maybe 40 actual channels everyone can enjoy (god willing) and then 30 channels of just high-priced sports packages and another 30 of pay-per-view. Then well, it may be 100 channels, but it will be just the type of post-hype underwhelming deliverable that most folks resent D* for to begin with. Sorry, but if D* is going to tout 100 HD channels, then as a general HD sub I would expect to see 100 channels. Period. And THAT is what I've been saying for monthes now too.

So yes, if I'm wrong, I'm wrong...great. But if there is 100 decent HD channels to watch out there, I won't be feeling sorry for myself for very long! :D

You need to read all the existing topics on this subject; it's been hashed over for months. They will have more HD than anyone else, sat issues notwithstanding.

Having looked over the list of proposed HD channels, and looking very closely at the total lack of HD content today in existing channels that have the word "HD" in the title, I haven't the slightest tiniest doubt that E* will have more 16x9 content hours available to any individual customer on January 1st. (I read the other thread, and counting "NFL Season Ticket" and "RSN"s is both bogus - one requires a special $200 subscription and the other blacks out most of the programming, even when the channel is CONUS).

This is because most of the "HD" channels, like A&E-HD for example, have very little HD content. (In fact, even the big broadcast networks, ABC and so forth, have very little HD content - for example, none of the soaps are in HD - how hard is it to point an HD camera at actors in a set?)

"First of all, there are no Voom channels, there is nothing like that that people would consider not really quality channels" - DirecTV exec

This sounds like a Democratic or Republican party hack statement. Today, I recorded an HD program on the painter "Goya" on GalleryHD. HD allows you to see even the texture on oil paintings - it's like going to a museum halfway around the world without the air fare. So, Mr. DirecTV Exec - what "quality" is missing ? Evidently the usual "cable channel" fare - "When Animals Attack Celebrities" is "quality" and art is not quality. Welcome to the 21st Century.

I also watched an HD program about collectible antique radios on TreasureHD. On the various Voom channels, you have arts programming, cheezy movies, music concerts, sports, travel, foreign films, and the lastest fashions. All in 16x9 HD.

Right now, I estimate that E* has 5-10 times as many hours per customer of 16x9 HD programming as D*. If I were allowed to not count "talking heads" shows where a guy is filmed with an HD camera, introducing SD content (cf "Sportscenter"), then it would probably be 50-100 times as many hours...

...
This is because most of the "HD" channels, like A&E-HD for example, have very little HD content. (In fact, even the big broadcast networks, ABC and so forth, have very little HD content - for example, none of the soaps are in HD - how hard is it to point an HD camera at actors in a set?)

...Minor correction. Young and the Restless on CBS is in HD. Maybe not in your DMA, because some stations can't timeshift HD. But it's sent from CBS in HD.

I also watched an HD program about collectible antique radios on TreasureHD. On the various Voom channels, you have arts programming, cheezy movies, music concerts, sports, travel, foreign films, and the lastest fashions. All in 16x9 HD.

Right now, I estimate that E* has 5-10 times as many hours per customer of 16x9 HD programming as D*. If I were allowed to not count "talking heads" shows where a guy is filmed with an HD camera, introducing SD content (cf "Sportscenter"), then it would probably be 50-100 times as many hours...

But how long have you been an E* customer? I have for 6 months and have seen everything I want to see on the VOOM channels...multiple times. The downside right now is the 24x7 HD channels run the same programs over and over again, DiscoveryHD and HDNet included. So when it comes to original programming I'd bet the local networks, ESPN and the 24x7 HD channels probably come out pretty close over a one year period.

But how long have you been an E* customer? I have for 6 months and have seen everything I want to see on the VOOM channels...multiple times. The downside right now is the 24x7 HD channels run the same programs over and over again, DiscoveryHD and HDNet included. So when it comes to original programming I'd bet the local networks, ESPN and the 24x7 HD channels probably come out pretty close over a one year period.

So what are we saying here, that Voom is about as good and just about anything else, including DiscoveryHD and HDNet?

If D* does have those mythical magical 100 channels (and they aren't just megabucks sports packs or PPV), I sure hope they have Voom too...it would totally suck if D* neglected Voom soley because thier current subscriber base has been slamming it for years being overly-defensive without ever actually seeing it.

I really don't see why people are so stuck on the number 100 for D*. If they have 30 that is amazing in my eyes.

The facts are this: They will have the *capacity* for 100 HD channels with the launch of D10. They will then add any HD channels that are out there (other then Voom aparently, but that fact may change with the soon to be new owners) and as new HD channels come online they will be ready.

Besides, isn't this a E* thread talking about their new sats? Why has it turned into a "mine is bigger then yours" thread yet again...

Sorry for getting off topic.

I really don't see why people are so stuck on the number 100 for D*. If they have 30 that is amazing in my eyes.

The facts are this: They will have the *capacity* for 100 HD channels with the launch of D10. They will then add any HD channels that are out there (other then Voom aparently, but that fact may change with the soon to be new owners) and as new HD channels come online they will be ready.

Besides, isn't this a E* thread talking about their new sats? Why has it turned into a "mine is bigger then yours" thread yet again...


yeah...lets go back to talking about soccer and football!

:D :D :D

So yes, if I'm wrong, I'm wrong...great. But if there is 100 decent HD channels to watch out there, I won't be feeling sorry for myself for very long! :D



Perhaps the problem is that "we've" been conditioned to having to parse Charlie/ E*'s PR and psuedo-PR from the "installer-community" for so long, that "we" can no longer accept true statements made in good faith at face value.

Let the spinning begin!

When DirecTV first announced the "capacity" and "channels" this was meant to convince people that they would have more channels in HD than Dish. The DirecTV fans ran with this and were thumbing their noses at Dish... and were determined that DirecTV would have more HD than Dish by a large margin... and kept asking "where is Dish's announcement"..

So... now a snag in the plans... and people are running to the front to say "the numbers don't matter"... so, why did the number matter when it was first announced?

Seems like the number mattered until it looked like the number really wasn't going to happen... and now the number doesn't matter after all.

I would love to see DirecTV succeed... because it will push Dish to do the same... so I'm not looking for failure... but I don't realistically think they can have that many HD channels by the end of this year when so many of them aren't even planning to launch a channel in that time frame.

Looks like I don't have to wait for December to see people reacting to DirecTV not making good on the promise... because people are already trying to make excuses in advance :)

Perhaps the problem is that "we've" been conditioned to having to parse Charlie/ E*'s PR and psuedo-PR from the "installer-community" for so long, that "we" can no longer accept true statements made in good faith at face value.



I was already negatively conditioned by D* long before Charlie even mattered to me... :D

Let the spinning begin!

When DirecTV first announced the "capacity" and "channels" this was meant to convince people that they would have more channels in HD than Dish. The DirecTV fans ran with this and were thumbing their noses at Dish... and were determined that DirecTV would have more HD than Dish by a large margin... and kept asking "where is Dish's announcement"..

So... now a snag in the plans... and people are running to the front to say "the numbers don't matter"... so, why did the number matter when it was first announced?

Seems like the number mattered until it looked like the number really wasn't going to happen... and now the number doesn't matter after all.

I would love to see DirecTV succeed... because it will push Dish to do the same... so I'm not looking for failure... but I don't realistically think they can have that many HD channels by the end of this year when so many of them aren't even planning to launch a channel in that time frame.

Looks like I don't have to wait for December to see people reacting to DirecTV not making good on the promise... because people are already trying to make excuses in advance :)

Ummm, numbers never mattered to me. Fact is that DirecTV will have the capacity to carry every HD channel that is available. If a channel isn't in HD yet they can't carry it now can they.

If Dish can pull off what they are proposing then they just might have the same capacity to be able to carry every HD channel available.

Competition is good and I hope Dish can pull it off.

Then we'll be back to the same old Dish vs. DirecTV arguments: Sports vs. Movies. Except if DirecTV has the capacity to put up the movie channels they are missing then it becomes Sports vs. Voom.

And there is always a good rumble over PQ now and again. :D

From the Washington Post Wednesday, May 16, 2007

To increase capacities, DirecTV and Dish Network are launching more satellites. DirecTV said the first of two satellites is scheduled to be launched next month and the other later in the year, a timetable that is critical to ensuring that it can deliver on its 100-channel promise. DishNetwork's parent company, EchoStar, has said it plans to launch two satellites before the end of the year.

"We will continue to supply as much HD as is possible," EchoStar spokeswoman Cory Vasquez said, noting that the company would have the capacity to offer as many as 200 HD channels nationally next year.

Ummm, numbers never mattered to me. Fact is that DirecTV will have the capacity to carry every HD channel that is available. If a channel isn't in HD yet they can't carry it now can they.

True, but this is not what DirecTV has been trying to advertise nor what their supporters have been saying largely.

Dish currently has capacity right now to launch all HD that currently exists (not including locals of course as they are limited in that regard unlike DirecTV)... there just isn't much more Dish could put up right now that exists!

DirecTV right now is behind in capacity to launch nationals in HD, and thus they are way behind Dish right now.

DirecTV should have much more capacity by the end of the year... but the way they advertise and the way their supporters chime in, it is as if they really believe they will have 100 HD national channels this year... and that has never seemed realistic to me.

Not because of anything DirecTV is or isn't doing... but because doubt that many channels in HD will actually exist!

I've never doubted DirecTV's launching of satellites to add capacity... I've only doubted the claims of actual channels... and they seem to be wink-nudging when they say "100 channels" or "150 channels" by the end of the year, then in small print saying "subject to change" or "capacity only"... clearly trying (as most commercials do) to mislead and misdirect and get folks to sign up thinking they will have all these channels.

I have no doubts, pending disaster like the launch of another satellite company this year, that DirecTV will be up with the capacity... I just strongly doubt there will be anywhere near enough channels to make that matter.

By the time that many channels do exist, Dish will have had more than enough time to get their capacity up and ready to go as well... so I see this whole "capacity race" as meaningless.

DirecTV would be better suited to advertise their actual strengths over Dish than their imagined ones.

Maybe broadcasters should start planning to get another "loaner" channel (after 2-17-09, of course) and migrate everything over to MPEG-4. Then, they could compete on a level playing field with satellight and cable.

D* is only lauching 1 sat this year now, and the second in 2008.

I have no doubts, pending disaster like the launch of another satellite company this year, that DirecTV will be up with the capacity... I just strongly doubt there will be anywhere near enough channels to make that matter.We shall see.

Now, lets get back on topic.

Perhaps the problem is that "we've" been conditioned to having to parse Charlie/ E*'s PR and psuedo-PR from the "installer-community" for so long, that "we" can no longer accept true statements made in good faith at face value.




Heh, at least Charlie is better than certain Directv reps that stand in front of the press at CES and claim they have the best HD PQ of any provider!

Maybe broadcasters should start planning to get another "loaner" channel (after 2-17-09, of course) and migrate everything over to MPEG-4. Then, they could compete on a level playing field with satellight and cable.

Only problem there is... if OTA went to MPEG4 then we all would have to get new TVs OR new decoder boxes for those using standalone OTA boxes.

I wish they could have gone to MPEG4 OTA... but there will be so many MPEG2 HDTV setups out there, that it will be a long time before OTA could make that kind of leap.

Wrong.

Short of a satellite issue, they will have all the HD they say they will.

HD??? Really? When have they stated that they are going back to 1920x1080i???

Heh, at least Charlie is better than certain Directv reps that stand in front of the press at CES and claim they have the best HD PQ of any provider!
No, he's the guy who kept telling everyone the Superdish was due any day now....

Coors claims they sell the best tasting beer - and we know how true that statement is....

I'm not trying toi defend D* here, it's just they're simply using ad spin. They're claiming their HD looks the best, not that they have the highest resolution or bit rate. To many of their customers with crappy cable services or poor OTA quality, that may be true.