# Directv not to offer new HD channels until 2008?



## Skunky (Feb 8, 2007)

According to a Circuit City manager who claimed he had talked to a Directv rep, we won't be seeing new HD channels until early 2008? True?


----------



## David Platt (Dec 13, 2001)

I don't trust Circuit City's employees to give me accurate information about their own products. Why would I listen to them about somebody else's?


----------



## temp357 (Feb 18, 2004)

Heck, I'll up you. I wouldn't trust Directv employees to give me accurate informatin about their products let alone a Circuit City employee telling me about Directv.


----------



## harley3k (Jul 19, 2006)

I'll go one better. Not only would I not trust DirecTV customer service employees to tell me the truth about their offerings. I also wouldn't trust their marketing deparments, or anyone on their board of directors either.

Just take a look at the missed promises in their past. Peruse through their own press releases specifically the one's in January of each year about their CES announcements. You'll see all manner of promises about Home Media Centers and stuff that is nowhere to be found.

I have no doubt that DirecTV will eventually have a lot more HD channels. They'll have to just to survive. But to say you'll have 100+ when they neither actually exist, nor do they have the satellites in place to broadcast them is just vaporware to keep customers from bailing on them.

I would lay a big bet down in Vegas that they won't even have 50 new HD channels by June 2008. Any takers?

I know they have at least one less subscriber recently...that was me.

-h


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Very well put, H.


----------



## Billy66 (Dec 15, 2003)

harley3k said:


> I would lay a big bet down in Vegas that they won't even have 50 new HD channels by June 2008. Any takers?
> 
> -h


Yes, right here. I'll bet you $1000 or if cash isn't a good prize, then the most expensive TiVo available plus the longest prepaid service available to the winner.

I say 50 HD Channels before June 2008 and you say less than that.

Do you really want to put your money where your mouth is? If so, let's get a third party we trust to escrow our wagers until either June 08 or until the 50 are there.

Got the stones to really do it or were you just exaggerating?

{extends his hand to shake on it}


----------



## samo (Oct 7, 1999)

Billy66 said:


> Yes, right here. I'll bet you $1000 or if cash isn't a good prize, then the most expensive TiVo available plus the longest prepaid service available to the winner.
> 
> I say 50 HD Channels before June 2008 and you say less than that.
> 
> ...


Interesting bet. The odds of DirecTV to be able to deploy at least one of the satellites in 2007 are about 85%. The odds of DirecTV being able to obtain programming for 50+ HD channels are about 90%. So odds of you winning are about 4 to 1. Can we find a bookie for the side bets?


----------



## Hersheytx (Feb 15, 2003)

Unless the Sats to be boosted into orbit over the next 6 months do not make it, then Directv will have a lot more HD this year. 
Why would they spend billions of dollars on the new Sats and not use them?
Why would they make agreements with everyone under the sun to carry their HD channels and not carry them?
How hard is it to understand that the large networks like CNN want to have a spot in an HD lineup. 
Directv has been playing their ad spots with the Back to the Future clip stating that this year they would have 3 times more HD then cable. I have to believe they will not only get it done, they will blow cable out of the water.
Its going to be 1994 all over again. But instead of offering every channel under the sky in a digital format, Directv is going to offer every Channel in an HD format.

I get a kick out of reading this forum. It never surprises me how many people feel they have been taken to the cleaners and hung out to dry by Directv. They have a great service. They give good prices. And most of the time they are ahead of Cable by years. I think it will take cable 5 plus years to catch them on the HD part. They are going to have to rework entire cabling systems in most cities.


----------



## ShiningBengal (Mar 19, 2001)

Hersheytx said:


> Its going to be 1994 all over again. But instead of offering every channel under the sky in a digital format, Directv is going to offer every Channel in an HD format.
> 
> I get a kick out of reading this forum. It never surprises me how many people feel they have been taken to the cleaners and hung out to dry by Directv. They have a great service. They give good prices. And most of the time they are ahead of Cable by years. I think it will take cable 5 plus years to catch them on the HD part. They are going to have to rework entire cabling systems in most cities.


Every channel???? You have to be kidding! Which channels now available in HD are not now being carried by cable, FIOS, or satellite? Do they just majically appear when DirecTV, with less than 10% of TV viewership, snaps its fingers?

There will be more sports, and perhaps more pay-per-view. Very little else, since it doesn't exist and won't for years.


----------



## IOTP (Aug 7, 2001)

My best friends girl friends brothers team mate sister brother in law said new channels in December 07.

... and this one time at band camp...



Seriously -- everyones been saying oh, gotta jump on the HD bandwagon. Like an idiot, glad I did however, reality - bring on my channels already.


----------



## Scott Corbett (May 29, 2003)

I'm thinking there will be no more than 10 new, full time, real HD channels. So channels like Showtime HD and the two ESPNs would not count.

Sports and Locals are D*'s priority, that is why I probably will leave them after I see what new HD will be provided. I care zero about sports and networks. I can rent/buy lots of HD DVDs for $135 per month.


----------



## harley3k (Jul 19, 2006)

Billy66 said:


> Yes, right here. I'll bet you $1000 or if cash isn't a good prize, then the most expensive TiVo available plus the longest prepaid service available to the winner.
> 
> I say 50 HD Channels before June 2008 and you say less than that.
> 
> ...


I'm game. Cash is probably better since "the most expensive Tivo" won't do you much good if you're using DirecTV.

I said "50 new HD channels" - that means new HD channels beyond what they have now. It can't include existing channels like football/sports/Locals or PPV (I don't consider PPV as a 'National channel'). We're talking just HALF of the new 100 National HD channels they have promised and are advertising will be available THIS YEAR.

I said 'by June 2008', so that means on or before May 31st 2008.

There's no exceptions for the content not being available. That is to say, having the 'capacity' to have the channels doesn't count as having the channels. There must be 50 new National HD channels in their lineup. CNN, SciFi, and even that VOOM crap counts, but just because enough channels do not exist for them to offer, that does not void the bet. Launch explosions/problems also do not void the bet. A merger or change of ownership does not effect the bet, ie. if DISH and DirecTV were to merge, giving DirecTV 'ownership' of DISH's HD lineup. The spirit of the bet is that DirecTV will launch new satellites, and begin offering the 50 new National HD Channels by the time frame specified.

Sound good?

-h


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

As a TIVO addict what difference does it make if Directv adds 10 or 100 new HD channels if they're all in MPG4 which we can't get? This is a TIVO site isn't it?


----------



## beartrap (Nov 8, 2005)

Harley's got a strong position. I think the capacity will probably be there, but there's no way that the content will.


----------



## Billy66 (Dec 15, 2003)

Sounds fun Harley! Let's work out the logistics, choose an arbiter etc, but the basics of what you say sound good to me.

A better definition of what constitutes a channel, but I think that would represent the spirit of what you've written. I surely don't want any outs. The channel has to be up and broadcasting in what DTV (or the new company) can legally claim is HD.

Let's spend the next day or so and make this happen.


----------



## Billy66 (Dec 15, 2003)

harley3k said:


> ... "the most expensive Tivo" won't do you much good if you're using DirecTV.


I am strongly directed by the NFLST, but I like to keep my options open.


----------



## dagap (Dec 5, 2003)

Do shopping channels qualify?


----------



## Scott Corbett (May 29, 2003)

Cudahy said:


> As a TIVO addict what difference does it make if Directv adds 10 or 100 new HD channels if they're all in MPG4 which we can't get? This is a TIVO site isn't it?


Yeah, I keep forgetting, but that also figures into my equation,


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Love it. Harley quietly excluded all sports channels in his offer.


----------



## Billy66 (Dec 15, 2003)

I think he means subscritption sports like Sunday Ticket and League pass etc where there might be like 10 channels broadcasting in HD. RSN's I believe he (and I) intends to count.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Perhaps it'd be better to come up with a definition of a "qualifying HD channel"... something like must broadcast appropriate content around the clock; putting up slides with schedules isn't a "qualifying channel"; must be available for year-round monthly subscription, not PPV/PPD/PPS (pay-per-view/day/season), anything classed as "paid programming" isn't applicable, etc.


----------



## Scott Corbett (May 29, 2003)

dagap said:


> Do shopping channels qualify?


Not with me.


----------



## Enrique (May 15, 2006)

http://hd.broadcastnewsroom.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=104641

"We are looking into options for launching the second satellite, and it could be delayed," DirecTV spokesman Darris Gringeri said Friday. "We just don't know yet if it will be delayed into 2008Regardless, it will not change our plans for getting 100 channels of HD up by the end of the year because that that will be accomplished by the launch of the first satellite in Q3."

But Jimmy Schaeffler, chairman of the Carmel Group, believes DirecTV is underplaying the importance of the second satellite launch and its possible delay.


----------



## bpratt (Nov 20, 2004)

You guys need to realize that what D* means by 100 new HD channels is ABC, NBC, CBS and FOX spot beamed to 25 new locations in HD.


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

bpratt said:


> You guys need to realize that what D* means by 100 new HD channels is ABC, NBC, CBS and FOX spot beamed to 25 new locations in HD.


That's already been debunked as NOT being the meaning for 100 new HD channels.

When HD says 100 new HD channels, they're talking about NATIONAL channels: CNN, SciFi, USA, etc.

-----

This is going to be a FUN thread to watch!


----------



## Redux (Oct 19, 2004)

bpratt said:


> You guys need to realize that what D* means by 100 new HD channels is ABC, NBC, CBS and FOX spot beamed to 25 new locations in HD.


You just spoiled the fun.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

drew2k said:


> ...When HD says 100 new HD channels, they're talking about NATIONAL channels...


Yes, but is that what Billy and Harley are talking about? It seems pretty evident that they will probably have another 50 HD LIL channels by then, but not so much for CONUS channels. After all, DTV is claiming 1500 pending HD channels for LIL, which seems pretty comprehensive since there are only about 1700 TV stations in existence..

HD shopping channels? Before FX? Before 2008? Now that would be acceptable only from "Bizarro" DTV.


----------



## pmturcotte (May 7, 2001)

I think thats an important point, could we even name 100 national channels that DTV doesnt carry that are currently broadcasting in HD? I dont think we could name half that.


----------



## gastrof (Oct 31, 2003)

drew2k said:


> That's already been debunked as NOT being the meaning for 100 new HD channels.
> 
> When HD says 100 new HD channels, they're talking about NATIONAL channels: CNN, SciFi, USA, etc.
> 
> ...


SciFi broadcasts an HD version?

I don't think so.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

(A post I made recently in another thread)

I know there've been a few announcements or promises of some networks finally offering HD versions of themselves this year, but right now, there's really nothing even close to 50 or 75 HD channels anyway. 

* A&E HD
* Discovery HD Theater
* ESPN HD
* ESPN2 HD
* Food Network HD
* HDNet
* HDNet Movies
* The History Channel HD (launching early 2007)
* HGTV
* INHD
* MHD (Music: High Definition)
* National Geographic Channel HD
* NBA TV HD
* NFL Network HD
* Outdoor Channel 2 HD
* TNT HD
* Universal HD
* Versus HD
* Wealth TV HD

* Comcast SportsNet HD (Philadelphia, Baltimore/Washington)
* FSN HD
* MSG Network in HDTV (New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Pennsylvania)
* NESN HD (New England area)
* YES-HD (New York Yankees)

* Cinemax HD
* HBO HD
* Showtime HD
* Starz HD


28 channels.

Now, what channels that exist today does the average person really care to have in HD? What I mean is, just how many more HD channels that matter can there be? We all know inevitably there'll be HD shopping channels, and HD "paid programming" infomercial channels, of course...

Announced:
CNN HD (September 2007)
TBS HD
Cartoon Network HD
USA HD
SciFi HD
FX HD
Speed HD
The Weather Channel HD

And then there's that list of 60 unnamed channel commitments DirecTV keeps talking about. Who exactly could there be that anybody cares about? I suppose every movie channel version could be in HD. But I suppose the vast majority will end up being regional sports networks, right? DirecTV's main marketing push is always sports, so that'd fit.

Give me what exists today plus USA, SciFi, FX, ABC Family and CNN in HD and I'll never know an SD channel still exists. Ever. 

I certainly have no need for a "Law & Order HD channel" or an "ER HD" channel, which is probably the only way to reach over 100 HD channels in 2007.


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

gastrof said:


> SciFi broadcasts an HD version?
> 
> I don't think so.


Not yet, they don't. Nor does CNN or USA broadcast in HD ... yet. I was giving examples of the types of national HD channels that DirecTV will bring online as they become available.


----------



## vandiman (Dec 5, 2002)

dswallow said:


> (A post I made recently in another thread)
> ...
> 
> 27 channels.
> ...


Don't forget Versus HD, personally I wont care until bike racing season starts.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

vandiman said:


> Don't forget Versus HD, personally I wont care until bike racing season starts.


Not sure how I missed that because I certainly knew about it when I made that original post. Do you happen to know anything about The Golf Channel HD? I know there's a combo Golf/Versus channel that Comcast runs in some markets, and that there's a full time Versus HD channel; is there really a full time Golf Channel HD at the moment?


----------



## Hersheytx (Feb 15, 2003)

How many Voom channels are there? I see that they will include those too.
What about multiples of HBO and the rest. Like Starz. Have a channel for every thing under the sun. Family, action and what not.
Plus I get the feeling that there are others out there like Mark Cuban wanting to put up a new HD channel. It seems like venture capitalist is trying to start something new.
I have to believe that Directv's long term goal is to replace every SD channel with a HD channel. I am sure some will not change for a while, but most are going to want to be on that new teir.
How many of us will watch a rerun of a show we have seen at least 3 times just because its in HD.
Gosh, I am watching Firefly for the 5th time because its in HD.

It sure will be nice to see what happens in 6 months.


----------



## jones07 (Jan 30, 2001)

1) There are 15 Voom-HD channels

2) Ever is a long time, but I don't think we will ever see "every" SD channel replaced with a "Real" HD channel. On Directv or anyplace else.


----------



## Beckzilla (Jan 27, 2005)

temp357 said:


> Heck, I'll up you. I wouldn't trust Directv employees to give me accurate informatin about their products let alone a Circuit City employee telling me about Directv.


 What he said.


----------



## Beckzilla (Jan 27, 2005)

harley3k said:


> I'll go one better. Not only would I not trust DirecTV customer service employees to tell me the truth about their offerings. I also wouldn't trust their marketing deparments, or anyone on their board of directors either.
> 
> Just take a look at the missed promises in their past. Peruse through their own press releases specifically the one's in January of each year about their CES announcements. You'll see all manner of promises about Home Media Centers and stuff that is nowhere to be found.
> 
> ...


 What he said too.


----------



## Beckzilla (Jan 27, 2005)

Hersheytx said:


> Unless the Sats to be boosted into orbit over the next 6 months do not make it, then Directv will have a lot more HD this year.
> Why would they spend billions of dollars on the new Sats and not use them?
> Why would they make agreements with everyone under the sun to carry their HD channels and not carry them?
> How hard is it to understand that the large networks like CNN want to have a spot in an HD lineup.
> ...


 Not what he said. The HD service that DirecTV offers right now is a disgrace to all of us that own HD TV's. National Geographic Channel has been broadcasting in HD for over a year. Why isn't Directv offering it? Not exactly what I expect out of a so called leader in HD programming. What a joke. Directv had plenty of time to get the jump on HD channels and totally blew it. Their ads are also a joke and only good for a laugh.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

dswallow said:


> ...Give me what exists today plus USA, SciFi, FX, ABC Family and CNN in HD and I'll never know an SD channel still exists. Ever...


I would really be happy with just FX. There isn't one HD program on any of the channels that exist or are proposed (that I don't already have from DTV) that interests me in the least, other than a couple on FX. I like some of the shows on UHD and HDNet and HDNM, but nothing on the SD versions of the proposed HD channels or the other existing HD channels seems worth wanting. About the only SD show I watch is "The Daily Show".

NG? A&E? The Weather channel? Music videos?   Puhleez! I haven't bothered myself with any of that since, well ever.


----------



## bonscott87 (Oct 3, 2000)

Beckzilla said:


> Not what he said. The HD service that DirecTV offers right now is a disgrace to all of us that own HD TV's. National Geographic Channel has been broadcasting in HD for over a year. Why isn't Directv offering it? Not exactly what I expect out of a so called leader in HD programming. What a joke. Directv had plenty of time to get the jump on HD channels and totally blew it. Their ads are also a joke and only good for a laugh.


Uhh, no. They don't have the bandwidth to add any more HD channels. They pushed it adding TNT-HD a year ago (as seen by it's shutdown during Sunday Ticket). They have had a plan now for 3 years to address this issue and now all the pieces are in place other then then the new sats which are schedules to go up later this year.

As has been the plan all along the past 3 years.


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

I don't get it. This is a TIVO site and this particular thread page is for people with the TIVO HD250. So what HD channels is Directv going to add that can actually be seen by us?
What percentage of Directv HD customers have a box that can get 4mpeg? If it's less than a majority maybe they'll add a few more 2mpeg channels. Since Malone owns Starz I'm hopeful they will at least add that.


----------



## bonscott87 (Oct 3, 2000)

Cudahy said:


> I don't get it. This is a TIVO site and this particular thread page is for people with the TIVO HD250. So what HD channels is Directv going to add that can actually be seen by us?


None. And all HD channels in MPEG2 will be switched over to the KA sats and in MPEG4, most likely in less then 2 years. The Tivo can still record SD and OTA HD though.

Dare I saw it one more time that this has been the plan for 3 years now? 



> What percentage of Directv HD customers have a box that can get 4mpeg? If it's less than a majority maybe they'll add a few more 2mpeg channels. Since Malone owns Starz I'm hopeful they will at least add that.


Majority. H20 has been the only available non-DVR HD receiver for a year now and it's MPEG4.
Many people have been getting MPEG4 receivers on their own the past year to get HD locals and HD RSN's.
HR20 has also sold very well so far (despite some early issues).
Once the new HD channels go up this fall (in MPEG4) the floodgates will open for those that have been dragging their feet.

It's only a matter of time.


----------



## killzone (Oct 19, 2000)

I really don't think there will be 50 channels of HD material anytime soon. If you look at many of the Voom channels, they are about 90% rebroadcasts of the same stuff. They have maybe 3 hours of content a day. Then you have TNT-HD and very little of their content is actually HD. Even CBS didn't broadcast the pro bowl in HD.

As far as HBO, Starz etc, they will most likely only have 1 HD channel each. Again the issue is having enough content to be able to broadcast in HD. Not enough movies are currently available in HD. Even HBO-HD broadcasts some content that is not HD.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

bonscott87 said:


> Majority. H20 has been the only available non-DVR HD receiver for a year now and it's MPEG4.


A year is not very long in the history of DirecTV, and they've had HD receivers for, I dunno, at least six years. How do you know MPEG4 users are in the majority?


----------



## Pyroto (Jul 29, 2002)

>> I get a kick out of reading this forum. It never surprises me how many people feel they have been taken to the cleaners and hung out to dry by Directv. They have a great service. They give good prices. And most of the time they are ahead of Cable by years. I think it will take cable 5 plus years to catch them on the HD part. They are going to have to rework entire cabling systems in most cities.

You know, it's not nice getting fun from other people's pain.

There are many of us here, who have been told things that never happened, or happened months or years later. 

Read about how some people are told, and are still being told that they don't own their equipment, even though they paid fully for it.

Read about people who were told all the bugs were ironed out, but obviously aren't.

Read about the people who asked for a Tivo replacement, but got a DirectTV DVR replacement.

Read about those told there were no Tivos, but others who did receive them.

Read about some people who received better deals than others, simply by calling, and recalling numerous times. How's that a level playing field? What does that do to how customers feel.

Read about quite a few other "interesting" customer service issues here.

It may be all fun for you to read about, but we're real people here. Real people with real experiences that weren't so much fun.

No company is perfect. No customer service department is perfect. You come to your own conclusions after reading the hundreds of thousands of messages here, posted over many years. And you decide.


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

So I guess the only hope of having TIVO HD and Directv a couple of years from now will be if Malone renegotiates with TIVO. I love TIVO and have to have Directv to get the RedSox so I guess I'll just wait till they start taking away the HD they have now.


----------



## bonscott87 (Oct 3, 2000)

wmcbrine said:


> A year is not very long in the history of DirecTV, and they've had HD receivers for, I dunno, at least six years. How do you know MPEG4 users are in the majority?


Yes they have had HD for a while but not very many customers. They've signed up more HD customers in the past year then they have had in their entire history. So most of those customers got MPEG4 to start out with. So I think it's safe to say way more then half have MPEG4. 

Honestly though it really doesn't matter. This is the plan and within 2 years or so MPEG2 HD will be shutdown. 2 years from now there won't be all that many people left with HD that don't have at least one MPEG4 capable receiver, especially after all the new HD goes up later this year and you can place a pretty good bet that Sunday Ticket HD in 2008 will probably be MPEG4 only as the last push to get people to switch on their own.

They talked about this at CES. They plan to let people upgrade themselves as much as possible before having to force a shutdown. Carrots will make that happen. Already is with HD locals and HD RSNs.


----------



## bonscott87 (Oct 3, 2000)

Cudahy said:


> So I guess the only hope of having TIVO HD and Directv a couple of years from now will be if Malone renegotiates with TIVO. I love TIVO and have to have Directv to get the RedSox so I guess I'll just wait till they start taking away the HD they have now.


That would be the only way. But the only way it will happen is if the HR20 is a disaster in the next 6 months. It's already improved quite a bit and if it's rock solid by this summer along with all the other things they are rolling out that require the HR20, Malone will have no incentive at all to look Tivo's way.

The only hope of Tivo coming back is if the HR20 implodes by fall.


----------



## Hersheytx (Feb 15, 2003)

This from an article by the Motely Fool Newsletter

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2007/02/09/directv-dishes-out-high-def.aspx

DirecTV is making the right moves to capitalize on growth in HD. The company is launching two new satellites this year, and it has signed carriage agreements for almost 70 channels. This could prove to be a significant competitive advantage, which should translate to an improvement in net subscriber additions, average revenue per unit, and churn starting in early 2008.

I am thinking some is going to loose a bet.
Directv is going to do this in a big way.


----------



## Sir_winealot (Nov 18, 2000)

bonscott87 said:


> That would be the only way. But the only way it will happen is if the HR20 is a disaster in the next 6 months. It's already improved quite a bit and if it's rock solid by this summer along with all the other things they are rolling out that require the HR20, Malone will have no incentive at all to look Tivo's way.
> 
> The only hope of Tivo coming back is if the HR20 implodes by fall.


Hopefully the first 6 months (or the R15) aren't an indication of how the HR20 will fare. New bugs are appearing in the new dl's, while old bugs still exist for many.


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

I don't understand why Directv sees an advantage in alienating people who love Tivo.
At some point a lot of us will be forced to switch to Dish or cable for the bulk of our programming. How does that help Directv?


----------



## bigpuma (Aug 12, 2003)

Cudahy said:


> I don't understand why Directv sees an advantage in alienating people who love Tivo.
> At some point a lot of us will be forced to switch to Dish or cable for the bulk of our programming. How does that help Directv?


Because for every person they alienate they make up for it in more people who don't care about TiVo getting DVRs that they don't have to split the DVR fee with. The reality is the number of people who will feel alienated is fairly small. Sure some will leave but overall it will make more money for D*


----------



## harley3k (Jul 19, 2006)

Yah, the alienation of Tivo customers can't be a big deal for their bottom line really. A good portion of those alienated will convert to the new system anyway. And a few will leave, but they probably won't notice it as a blip on their charts.

I left ultimately because of Content. And also because of their DVR direction. I no longer saw their non-Tivo DVR offering as having an advantage over other provider's systems, so I was able to make the switch based on Content and price. DISH and FiOS have them beat on both points. But they are addressing the content issue with their new HD offerings. I just happen to think they are over-advertising it and promising things they cannot deliver in the time frame they have specified.

Odds-wise I think it's probably a coin toss if they get 1/2 of their 100 HD channels online by June 2008.

But even if they do it and I lose the bet, they still will have overpromised by 50 channels and 6 months...proving my original point.

-h


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Hersheytx said:


> DirecTV is making the right moves to capitalize on growth in HD. The company is launching two new satellites this year, and it has signed carriage agreements for almost 70 channels. This could prove to be a significant competitive advantage, which should translate to an improvement in net subscriber additions, average revenue per unit, and churn starting in early 2008.


Of course, that they seem incapable of actually naming 70 channels makes it all pretty suspect.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

Cudahy said:


> I don't understand why Directv sees an advantage in alienating people who love Tivo.
> At some point a lot of us will be forced to switch to Dish or cable for the bulk of our programming. How does that help Directv?


I have 3 series 2 tivo's and LOVE THEM

but I also have the HR20 and it's ok

it gets the job done, reboots sometimes, but since I have direcTV and HD, this is my option, it works

I miss using Tivo on my main tv (still use it on the other tv's) but it's not a killer


----------



## bonscott87 (Oct 3, 2000)

Cudahy said:


> I don't understand why Directv sees an advantage in alienating people who love Tivo.
> At some point a lot of us will be forced to switch to Dish or cable for the bulk of our programming. How does that help Directv?


Dish doesn't have Tivo.
Most cable doesn't have Tivo either (outside of a Tivo S3 for big $$$ and hope the cable company has cable cards that work).
Comcast Tivo announced but still not rolled out.

I'm just saying, DirecTV isn't all that worried about droves of people leaving DirecTV because of Tivo, where are they going to go? Not many options.

And as pointed out above, not that many people will leave because of no Tivo. Let's say for a WAG (wild arss guess) it's 10,000 people that leave. They'll sign up that many new customers next week. Let's go with an outrageous number of 100,000. They sign up that many new customers next 2 months if not quicker. It just doesn't matter to the bottom line of DirecTV. As evidenced by the record profits last quarter and low churn.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

dswallow said:


> Of course, that they seem incapable of actually naming 70 channels makes it all pretty suspect.


Oh, I dunno...

ESPNHD1
ESPNHD2
ESPNHD3
ESPNHD4...
...
...ESPNHD69
ESPNHD70.

Seems like a done deal to me.


----------



## hauntedsoul (Nov 25, 2006)

I'm with Cudahy, who cares! If it is not Tivo I dont want it ....Tivo is electronic crack and i am an addict. MUST HAVE HD TIVO D* wake up Dave


----------



## Hersheytx (Feb 15, 2003)

Pyroto said:


> >> I get a kick out of reading this forum. It never surprises me how many people feel they have been taken to the cleaners and hung out to dry by Directv. They have a great service. They give good prices. And most of the time they are ahead of Cable by years. I think it will take cable 5 plus years to catch them on the HD part. They are going to have to rework entire cabling systems in most cities.
> 
> You know, it's not nice getting fun from other people's pain.
> 
> ...


And Cable did the same. 
Cable modem will be in your area within the year sir! Never came...10 years and waiting.
HD sir. You bet. Should be the same time we get the cable modem....read above.
Cable DVR. I am not even sure they have one now that really works. (This from a friend that finally got rid of his last month).

So far Directv has promised me digital channels better then cable. (TRUE)
Got a Directv TIVO (4) and HD(TIVO) for the last 7 years. (TRUE)
Everytime I wanted to add a channel or change a package it took less then 2 minutes. (TRUE)
Every channel I wanted and more (TRUE)
Rolled out HD locals and started the process for HD heaven (TRUE)

Maybe I am a bit to happy. But I really have enjoyed Directv all these years. And I have never once thought my service was subpar to cable. (Though I do envy those FOIS people their internet speed).

I am willing to give Directv until Sept-October before I start getting upset about my HD. I have read every Directv statement for the last 4 years about their plan. If anything I think it needed to be started 2 years earlier, but nothing is perfect.

If you are really upset with Directv and feel they have done you wrong. Then check out the competition. One of my closest friends asked me if he should choose FOIS from Verizon or Directv. 
I did not hesitate. I told him with all the rooms he wanted to have a DVR and the ability to get internet at 15 megs speed, it was no choice. He had to get FOIS. 
And here I am giving him a Directv TIVO (had one laying around) just to get Directv 6 months before.
I am a not here to force others to follow my path. But I think its time for everyone to take a chill pill and give Directv the time to put the next 2 Sats into space.
Just like they said they would.....not late....right on time.


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

As long as they keep the HD channels they have now(that we can get with HDtivo) I can live with it. Maybe they'll add Starz in 2mpeg since Malone owns it.


----------



## Scott Corbett (May 29, 2003)

TyroneShoes said:


> Oh, I dunno...
> 
> ESPNHD1
> ESPNHD2
> ...


I am concerned that this is almost exactly what will happen. I will be gone if it turns out this way.


----------



## bonscott87 (Oct 3, 2000)

Cudahy said:


> As long as they keep the HD channels they have now(that we can get with HDtivo) I can live with it.


They will for now until a "critical mass" of people have converted to MPEG4 receivers. Most people are thinking around 2 years after the 2008 NFL season when HD starts getting shutdown on MPEG2. Really all depends how fast people get an MPEG4 receiver once the new stuff goes up.


----------



## stiffi (Jun 14, 2006)

TyroneShoes said:


> Oh, I dunno...
> 
> ESPNHD1
> ESPNHD2
> ...


Don't forget ESPN8 "The Ocho"


----------



## unclebrownie (Dec 31, 2001)

If we have to go to MEPG 4 will we still get all our locals that we now get with MEPG 2 or will we be told that we now need to get the ok from the Net's to receive them ? 
If that is the case it's goodby to DTV.


----------



## Hersheytx (Feb 15, 2003)

It seems they are making a decision on that based on customer feedback. I think it will come down to how many people still have no HD receivers or like most have TIVOs that we still want to use for recording local network programming.
I sure hope they will keep them too. Hate to loose all my Tivos.


----------



## HomieG (Feb 17, 2003)

dswallow said:


> Of course, that they seem incapable of actually naming 70 channels makes it all pretty suspect.


Perhaps they just haven't announced yet that 65 of them are shopping channels.


----------



## Sir_winealot (Nov 18, 2000)

bonscott87 said:


> They will for now until a "critical mass" of people have converted to MPEG4 receivers. Most people are thinking around 2 years after the 2008 NFL season when HD starts getting shutdown on MPEG2. Really all depends how fast people get an MPEG4 receiver once the new stuff goes up.


I hope you're right ...I've heard mention of it being shutoff as early as sometime this year (summer) -which I didn't believe.

Seems to me it would take quite a while just to get folks swapped out.


----------



## bonscott87 (Oct 3, 2000)

Sir_winealot said:


> I hope you're right ...I've heard mention of it being shutoff as early as sometime this year (summer) -which I didn't believe.
> 
> Seems to me it would take quite a while just to get folks swapped out.


Yea, there's no way it would be this summer. It probably won't even be until fall until new HD starts to arrive. It'll be at least a year and probably 2.

But it will all depend on how many of their HD customers get an MPEG4 receiver. If people get one quickly then it might be sooner. We're already seeing a lot of HR10 owners add an HR20 to their home so many are already set to receive MPEG4.

I'll bet you'll have a lot of HR10's die from hard drive failure before MPEG2 HD is turned off.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Sir_winealot said:


> I hope you're right ...I've heard mention of it being shutoff as early as sometime this year (summer) -which I didn't believe.
> 
> Seems to me it would take quite a while just to get folks swapped out.


I'm with you. Weighing how believable something might be is sometimes made easier if you examine the likely motivations behind it.

I know if I were not the exceptionally moral person I am (ahem!) and worked high up at DTV I would probably consider having my minions/trolls drop a few completely baseless and unfounded rumors to that affect (to go along with the baseless and unfounded rumors of 1500 HD channels) just to scare the bejesus out of HR10 owners. The Nixon-era GOP wrote the book on this type of disinformation.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

I don't see an incentive for them to scare HR10 owners.


----------



## astayton (Aug 30, 2006)

I just Talked to D* and they said that there were going to be 150 New HD channels comming in Mid March of this year. 

I know you can't believe most of what they say, but could this be true?


----------



## deezel629 (May 30, 2006)

astayton said:


> I just Talked to D* and they said that there were going to be 150 New HD channels comming in Mid March of this year.
> 
> I know you can't believe most of what they say, but could this be true?


Of course it's true. It has to be. I mean, you saw the Back To The Future commercial, right?


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

astayton said:


> I just Talked to D* and they said that there were going to be 150 New HD channels comming in Mid March of this year.
> 
> I know you can't believe most of what they say, but could this be true?


I absolutely guarantee you that this is completely untrue and is just typical of the average DirecTV CSR's knowledge these days. There's facts behinds the misstatements, but it still amounts to a pretty serious bit of misleading information.

Once DirecTV launches BOTH of the next two satellites, scheduled for launch later this year, they will have the bandwidth available to broadcast nationally about 150 HD channels. They actually have backed down a bit with public statements and usually say "over 100 HD channels" now.

a) BOTH satellites have to be launched and have to become operational. Roughly half the bandwidth will be available from just a single satellite.

b) DirecTV 10 is scheduled to launch in June 2007. Typically there's at least a month before a newly launched satellite is tested in orbit and ready to be placed into service. So the very earliest any new use of this satellite could occur is July 2007.

c) DirecTV 11 was supposed to be launched in the Fall of 2007 by SeaLaunch. SeaLaunch recently had a launch failure and is investigating the cause and has not yet determined when they'll begin launching again. DirecTV has stated that DirecTV 11's launch may be delayed until 2008.

d) When the bandwidth becomes available, there's still the matter of actually having HD content (channels) available to broadcast. There are not currently more than about 30 HD channels in existence (excluding the Voom HD "channels"). And perhaps another 10 or 15 have actually been named.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

wmcbrine said:


> I don't see an incentive for them to scare HR10 owners.


I see plenty, even without the tinfoil layer in my hat. 

DTV would obviously love it if everyone had their DVR and not Tivo, for one thing. You can't sell MPEG-4 channels, not a single one, to a customer who is still convinced that the HR10 is a better solution, and they still have to fork over $1.25 a month per unit of that sub's discretionary income directly to Tivo for those who keep HR10's active. That's two huge instances of what is referred to in the sales biz as the unpardonable sin of "leaving money on the table", and that was the prime motivator to go in-house with their DVR in the first place.

If DTV starts rumors about how obsolete the HR10 will be "very soon" and how there will be "1500 HD channels" before you can say "Spaceway" that HR10 owners can't get without moving to the HR20, that would tend to shake the faith of the converted, or at least those gullible enough to buy into the lie. Disinformation campaigns are a fact of life specifically because they work so well. P. T. Barnum really wasn't far off the mark in his assessment of the power of "spinning" the truth.

So the motivations are a no-brainer, and really very easy to understand. Call me cynical, I can take it. But if you do, you run the risk of being called exceptionally naive in return.


----------



## samo (Oct 7, 1999)

Generally agree with what you said, but you missed couple of factors.
1. Sales of advertisement space. DirecTV is selling ads on interactive mix channels and keeps revenue to themselves.
2. Deal like recent one with Nielsen to sell aggregate user viewing habits. Again a source of revenue (as you put it - "money on a table") that DirecTV doesn't have to share with TiVo.


----------



## bonscott87 (Oct 3, 2000)

There are a lot of things DirecTV plans to do on the HR20 software platform that generate income that they can't do on a Tivo. 

In fact one of the good rumors is that Tivo didn't want to change their interface to accommodate those things thus got the boot. Add to it that DirecTV wants people loyal to DirecTV, not to a 3rd part software. You already see that by some people that will leave DirecTV simply for Tivo. It's a lot easier now to let a few thousand go because of that then perhaps a million or more 5 years from now.

The more you lean on 3rd parties the less control you have of your bottom line. Doesn't make good business in most cases.


----------



## HomieG (Feb 17, 2003)

astayton said:


> I just Talked to D* and they said that there were going to be 150 New HD channels comming in Mid March of this year.
> 
> I know you can't believe most of what they say, but could this be true?


Well, it could be true if they allocated more bandwidth to their current SD offering, which currently is sub-par. So, in essence, their sub-par SD would become decent SD, which for D* would be HD...if you get what I mean. Then there's the matter of their HD-lite offerings...


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

TyroneShoes said:


> DTV would obviously love it if everyone had their DVR and not Tivo, for one thing. You can't sell MPEG-4 channels, not a single one, to a customer who is still convinced that the HR10 is a better solution,


They aren't selling them, so far. If there are plans to do so, I haven't even seen it rumoured. All the current and announced MPEG-4 channels fall within existing plans, for no additional cost.



> _and they still have to fork over $1.25 a month per unit of that sub's discretionary income directly to Tivo for those who keep HR10's active._


And to get rid if that expense, they supply you with a subsidized HR20. How long does _that_ take to pay off?

Also, I think you're missing something big: "Scaring" HR10 users can result in their leaving DirecTV altogether. So DirecTV has saved paying Tivo $1.25, but lost $50+ from the customer. Not a good deal.

Even if you posit additional, future revenue streams from the HR20 (there are none now), it's not in DirecTV's interest to risk driving people off. Positive incentives (i.e., "hey, you can get all these new channels!" instead of "you're going to lose the channels you have") are less risky.


----------



## Runch Machine (Feb 7, 2002)

dswallow said:


> I absolutely guarantee you that this is completely untrue and is just typical of the average DirecTV CSR's knowledge these days. There's facts behinds the misstatements, but it still amounts to a pretty serious bit of misleading information.
> 
> Once DirecTV launches BOTH of the next two satellites, scheduled for launch later this year, they will have the bandwidth available to broadcast nationally about 150 HD channels. They actually have backed down a bit with public statements and usually say "over 100 HD channels" now.
> 
> ...


Are you saying they have to launch BOTH satellites before they can add even one new HD Channel? If two sats can provide enough bandwidth for 100+ HD channels, why can't the one satellite going up in June be used for the 30 or so HD national channels that exist or are announced to exist soon?


----------



## bonscott87 (Oct 3, 2000)

Runch Machine said:


> Are you saying they have to launch BOTH satellites before they can add even one new HD Channel? If two sats can provide enough bandwidth for 100+ HD channels, why can't the one satellite going up in June be used for the 30 or so HD national channels that exist or are announced to exist soon?


No, that's not what he is saying. DirecTV has already stated that even with just one sat this year they can still add the HD they planned to. Both sats allow them up to the 150 mark.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Runch Machine said:


> Are you saying they have to launch BOTH satellites before they can add even one new HD Channel? If two sats can provide enough bandwidth for 100+ HD channels, why can't the one satellite going up in June be used for the 30 or so HD national channels that exist or are announced to exist soon?


I only emphasized "both" in the context of the capacity number that DirecTV's quoting in various advertisements. Capacity is roughly equally spread between the two satellites.


----------



## harley3k (Jul 19, 2006)

bonscott87 said:


> There are a lot of things DirecTV plans to do on the HR20 software platform that generate income that they can't do on a Tivo.
> 
> In fact one of the good rumors is that Tivo didn't want to change their interface to accommodate those things thus got the boot.


I could buy that Tivo didn't want to change their interface at that time.

But if you look at what they've done on the upcoming Comcast Tivo, it is very different. They had to accomodate things like VOD, which was new for them, as well as tackle an entirely new hardware platform - the Motorola DVR's.

Maybe their lost relationship wtih DirecTV forced them to change their ways.

-h


----------



## bonscott87 (Oct 3, 2000)

harley3k said:


> I could buy that Tivo didn't want to change their interface at that time.
> 
> But if you look at what they've done on the upcoming Comcast Tivo, it is very different. They had to accomodate things like VOD, which was new for them, as well as tackle an entirely new hardware platform - the Motorola DVR's.
> 
> ...


I wouldn't doubt that one bit. If Tivo didn't learn they would really be in trouble.


----------



## harley3k (Jul 19, 2006)

It looks like the Weather Channel HD is about ready to go live.

Not looking good for my bet with Billy66 so far...

http://www.broadcastnewsroom.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=107739

     

-h


----------



## Billy66 (Dec 15, 2003)

Awesome, the weather channel! If that were HD now, I could tell my parents that every channel was in HD. 

Well, I just need the weather channel to start broadcasting and a successful satellite launch and I'm 2% there.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

harley3k said:


> It looks like the Weather Channel HD is about ready to go live.
> 
> Not looking good for my bet with Billy66 so far...
> 
> ...


Several years ago there was some weather event going on... a big hurricane making landfall probably. And I was reading all sorts of things online, but nobody had pictures. So I tune to The Weather Channel figuring this is a VIDEO channel dedicated to weather coverage, and they talked about it, showed a bunch of their own talking heads spouting all sorts of nonsense about it, and put up satellite images and radar animations. Not one single live video shot of anything related to the weather, not even anything like weather preparation. Nada.

If a channel dedicated to the weather can't even manage a few seconds of actual video coverage of a major weather event, I think the channel is mostly worthless.

Maybe things have changed, but so far in the few times I even think about The Weather Channel and go have a look, it's amateurish and uninteresting and just not very imaginative with presentation at all. It may as well just be a text crawl on the screen.

So yeah, it's always nice to have more HD, but I think I'd find a shopping channel in HD more compelling than The Weather Channel. Now if someone were to actually create a channel dedicated to the weather, it could be great in HD. But The Weather Channel isn't it.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

wmcbrine said:


> They aren't selling them, so far. If there are plans to do so, I haven't even seen it rumoured. All the current and announced MPEG-4 channels fall within existing plans, for no additional cost...


I hope you are not suggesting that a company with a board and shareholders has invested a quarter of a billion in infrastructure for MPEG-4 and expects no ROI. Of course they will be selling them.



wmcbrine said:


> ...And to get rid if that expense, they supply you with a subsidized HR20. How long does _that_ take to pay off...


Not being privy to their balance sheets, it would be hard to say, but a subscriber is actually valued as an asset worth about 3-5 times the list price of an HR20, so offering one to keep a sub is a bargain. And subsidizing STBs is the typical business model of DBS, and has been since day one in 1993. A $300 DVR costs them about $100, so it probably takes 6 months or so. After that, the rest is gravy. Especially if you force them into a 2-year contract.



wmcbrine said:


> ...Also, I think you're missing something big: "Scaring" HR10 users can result in their leaving DirecTV altogether. So DirecTV has saved paying Tivo $1.25, but lost $50+ from the customer...


 That is always a risk, but I think you are missing my point, which is that they are "scaring" folks into a lower perceived value for the HR10, and not attempting to scare folks away. If you tell them only what they have is about to turn to crap, that might indeed scare them away. If you also tell them that you have the solution to their problem (a free HR20) that doesn't scare folks away unless they are also wise to what an existing piece of crap is being offered to them. DTV has drunk the Kool-Aid, and in their minds the HR20 is the answer. To their way of thinking, they have all bases covered. Of course whether they really do or not is debatable, but viewpoints removed from inside DTV are bound to be more objective about it.


----------



## bonscott87 (Oct 3, 2000)

dswallow said:


> Several years ago there was some weather event going on... a big hurricane making landfall probably. And I was reading all sorts of things online, but nobody had pictures. So I tune to The Weather Channel figuring this is a VIDEO channel dedicated to weather coverage, and they talked about it, showed a bunch of their own talking heads spouting all sorts of nonsense about it, and put up satellite images and radar animations. Not one single live video shot of anything related to the weather, not even anything like weather preparation. Nada.
> 
> If a channel dedicated to the weather can't even manage a few seconds of actual video coverage of a major weather event, I think the channel is mostly worthless.
> 
> ...


Oh yea, they are everywhere live and on the ground during hurricanes. It's even funny for the locals to tell Jim Cantore to go home because the dang things usually make landfall wherever he is. 

Kristina Abernathy in HD. Nuff said!


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Billy66 said:


> ...Well, I just need the weather channel to start broadcasting and a successful satellite launch and I'm 2% there.


Spoken like a true veteran member of Gamblers Anonymous. 

"The 24-hour weather-focused network plans to launch a high-definition simulcast of its programming ...They will also have to be designed to "safe-protect" a 4:3-aspect-ratio picture for standard-definition viewers..."

So what this means is that the side pillars will contain absolutely no information justifying the 16:9 aspect ratio. Not only that, but graphics have lots of high-frequency components. To avoid mosquito noise artifacts DTV will have to do a much better job delivering this channel than they are doing currently.


----------



## HomieG (Feb 17, 2003)

bonscott87 said:


> Kristina Abernathy in HD. Nuff said!


 :up:  And could her pron debut be far behind? (pun intended).


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

bonscott87 said:


> Kristina Abernathy in HD. Nuff said!


Not that I'm personally interested, but I do wish people would post a picture when they're gonna ogle someone in a post.


----------



## HomieG (Feb 17, 2003)

dswallow said:


> Not that I'm personally interested, but I do wish people would post a picture when they're gonna ogle someone in a post.


Pick your pic 

http://www.kapturedforyou.com/kristina/kristina.html


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

HomieG said:


> Pick your pic
> 
> http://www.kapturedforyou.com/kristina/kristina.html


So you guys are into Martha Stewart lookalikes?


----------



## HomieG (Feb 17, 2003)

dswallow said:


> So you guys are into Martha Stewart lookalikes?


It's what makes us all so individual


----------



## harley3k (Jul 19, 2006)

TyroneShoes said:


> Spoken like a true veteran member of Gamblers Anonymous.
> 
> "The 24-hour weather-focused network plans to launch a high-definition simulcast of its programming ...They will also have to be designed to "safe-protect" a 4:3-aspect-ratio picture for standard-definition viewers..."
> 
> So what this means is that the side pillars will contain absolutely no information justifying the 16:9 aspect ratio. Not only that, but graphics have lots of high-frequency components. To avoid mosquito noise artifacts DTV will have to do a much better job delivering this channel than they are doing currently.


They could just letterbox the 4:3 broadcast like the other channels do.

We're starting to get our evening news in HD in Dallas now and I have to say that an HD weather map is kinda cool.

-h


----------



## harley3k (Jul 19, 2006)

TyroneShoes said:


> Spoken like a true veteran member of Gamblers Anonymous.


And I'm going to have to increase the buy-ins at my monthly poker games in hopes of making enough cash to cover this D* bet should I actually lose.



But if I win, hello Series3 Tivo 
If I lose, well I'll save the money on the Series3 because I'll have to sign back up for D* to get all those cool new HD channels...unless Fios keeps pace with them.

-h


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

dswallow said:


> So you guys are into Martha Stewart lookalikes?


That must be Kristina's grandmother in those pics. And granny should drop 40.


----------



## Billy66 (Dec 15, 2003)

harley3k said:


> I would lay a big bet down in Vegas that they won't even have 50 new HD channels by June 2008. Any takers?
> 
> -h


Just to bump this up to the top.

Harley3k and I did follow through and make this bet. Although there aren't 50 new HD channels up right now, it seems quite apparent. Therefore, harley3k and I have reached an advanced settlement in our bet with his donation on my behalf to The V Foundation for Cancer Research

It was a fun little bet and harley3k is a stand up guy to follow through given that we're complete strangers. :up:

Not to be too much of a schill, but if anyone here is inclined, I'm sure The V Foundation could use a few more bucks too.

Don't give up, don't ever give up.

Thanks harley3k!

http://www.dehr.net/vid/jimmyvspeech.wmv


----------



## milominderbinder (Dec 18, 2006)

They added 11 more HD channels today for a total of around 40 so you ar enot to 50 yet...

Pretty safe bet in the next week or two though.

- Craig


----------



## CosmoKramer (Jan 23, 2007)

It was only three channels for me on the west coast! 



milominderbinder said:


> They added 11 more HD channels today for a total of around 40 so you ar enot to 50 yet...
> 
> Pretty safe bet in the next week or two though.
> 
> - Craig


----------



## trex527 (Jul 16, 2007)

Outside of the Sci Fi HD channel what were the others?


----------



## trex527 (Jul 16, 2007)

Nevermind,I looked them up myself by going to their website...I guess if more people only took the time.


----------



## milominderbinder (Dec 18, 2006)

Sorry about that.

Here is the batch of HD channels from Oct 3:

Comcast SportsNet Chicago HD (Channel 640) 
Comcast SportsNet Mid-Atlantic HD (Channel 629)
New England Sports Network/NESN HD(Channel 623)
SportsNet New York HD (Channel 625)
YES HD (Channel 622)
Cinemax East (Channel 512)
Cinemax West (Channel 514)
HBO West (Channel 504)
Bravo (Channel 273)
SciFi Channel (Channel 244)
USA Network (Channel 242)

Before someone asks, here is the first batch as well:

A&E (Channel 265)
Animal Planet (Channel 282)
Big Ten Network (Channel 220)
CNN (Channel 202)
The Discovery Channel (Channel 278)
The History Channel (Channel 269)
The Movie Channel East (Channel 544)
NFL Network (Channel 212)
Showtime West (Channel 540)
Showtime too (Channel 538)
The Smithsonian Channel (Channel 267)
The Science Channel (Channel 284)
Starz Comedy (Channel 519)
Starz East (Channel 522)
Starz West (Channel 521)
Starz Edge (Channel 520)
Starz Kids and Family (Channel 518)
TBS (Channel 247)
TLC (Channel 280)
Versus / The Golf Channel (Channel 604)
The Weather Channel (Channel 362)

Over at AVS, there is a group who are monitoring what new HD channels are being tested:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=908393

- Craig


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

ummm

New England Sports Network/NESN HD(Channel 623)

has been there for a long time now


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

MikeMar said:


> ummm
> 
> New England Sports Network/NESN HD(Channel 623)
> 
> has been there for a long time now


Not as a NATIONAL 24/7 RSN, it is now available to people OUTSIDE the spotbeam area.


----------



## pmturcotte (May 7, 2001)

ebonovic said:


> Not as a NATIONAL 24/7 RSN, it is now available to people OUTSIDE the spotbeam area.


Yikes I've been out of this conversation for 8 months or so when it was only a spotbeam channel.

Earl, are you saying that NESN HD is now available in the DC Area (or anywhere really) as a national HD feed?

I guess its put up or shut up for me. I had said I would never switch to the HR20 until they either had DLB available or gave me NESN HD down here in Northern VA. Doh!


----------



## bonscott87 (Oct 3, 2000)

pmturcotte said:


> Yikes I've been out of this conversation for 8 months or so when it was only a spotbeam channel.
> 
> Earl, are you saying that NESN HD is now available in the DC Area (or anywhere really) as a national HD feed?
> 
> I guess its put up or shut up for me. I had said I would never switch to the HR20 until they either had DLB available or gave me NESN HD down here in Northern VA. Doh!


Yes, it's available everywhere just like the SD version. I get it in Michigan. Of course pro games are blacked out just like the SD version unless you have the premium sports package and they are using the NESN feed. Again, no different then the SD version.


----------



## pmturcotte (May 7, 2001)

But it would be great to record Sportsdesk in the morning in HD...


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

ebonovic said:


> Not as a NATIONAL 24/7 RSN, it is now available to people OUTSIDE the spotbeam area.


I don't understand the attraction for the regional sports channels being shown nationally. I haven't had them for several years, but when I did, they all seemed to broadcast 80-90% of the same thing. When they had pro sports, the channels were always blacked out. Has that changed? What are folks getting for this extra 10 or 12 bucks?


----------



## joed32 (Jul 9, 2005)

They are still the same. I pay $9 so I can see all of the local sports shows that talk about my team. The rest I don't watch.


----------



## Philly Bill (Oct 6, 2004)

Well if you're a Philly fan living in Memphis... (of course Comcast Philly STILL isn't on - though they do show some of their broadcasts... haven't figured that out yet)...

OR a New England fan living in Michigan... then the RSNs are nice.


----------



## sluciani (Apr 21, 2003)

RS4 said:


> I don't understand the attraction for the regional sports channels being shown nationally.


What about folks (especially in the NE) that retire to warmer climes and want to continue to follow their home teams? /steve


----------



## pmturcotte (May 7, 2001)

sluciani said:


> What about folks (especially in the NE) that retire to warmer climes and want to continue to follow their home teams? /steve


Exactly. I live in DC but watch NESN Sportsdesk every morning as it has by far the best coverage of the New England teams.


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

sluciani said:


> What about folks (especially in the NE) that retire to warmer climes and want to continue to follow their home teams? /steve


So, are you saying that the pro games aren't blacked out anymore? For instance, if you live if FL, can you see the Celtics or Bruins? If that's the case, then yes, it makes perfect sense to me.


----------



## Rigelian (May 21, 2003)

RS4 said:


> So, are you saying that the pro games aren't blacked out anymore? For instance, if you live if FL, can you see the Celtics or Bruins? If that's the case, then yes, it makes perfect sense to me.


The home games are still blacked out. What isn't blacked out are the local shows about your favorite sports team. For example, I live in Berkeley, CA, I follow the Seattle Seahawks. I love being able to watch the local shows about the Seattle Seahawks. Or the Fox Northwest Sports reports on the Mariners and the Sonics. It's not hard to see why someone would be interested in this if their a sport fans out of their local market.


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

Rigelian said:


> The home games are still blacked out. What isn't blacked out are the local shows about your favorite sports team. For example, I live in Berkeley, CA, I follow the Seattle Seahawks. I love being able to watch the local shows about the Seattle Seahawks. Or the Fox Northwest Sports reports on the Mariners and the Sonics. It's not hard to see why someone would be interested in this if their a sport fans out of their local market.


Ah, okay - that makes sense. I live in Indy and Peyton Manning is on TV so much that I can't imagine people actually paying more money just to watch a show about him from some other part of the country.  I enjoy the action of the games, but beyond that, don't watch much of the other shows so I guess I was thinking old fashioned.


----------



## bonscott87 (Oct 3, 2000)

Also when you get a sports package like Center Ice it "opens up" the games on the RSNs because they use those feeds. Thus the side effect of the HD RSNs going national is that now those with Center Ice and League Pass and so forth can watch the games in HD. It will greatly expand the ability to offer HD games of these sports packages.


----------

