It's almost sad because I really think he just doesn't get it.
But there's some in this forum that don't either.
I guess maybe I'm one of those who 'doesn't get it'.
Dish is a publicly traded company and as such its management are first and foremost responsible to the owners of the company. If most of the people on this forum are owners then I acquiesce. If not, then profit is the most important part of the package and the complaints of most fall on deaf ears.
Charlie will get more bang for the buck by opening up additional HD bandwidth to channels that the average joe will recognize and by adding locals for more subscribers.
No one can argue the point the the Voom channels offer a great deal more HD content than any of the other channels available. Unfortunately, Monsters HD is not nearly as recognizable to the average person as say Spike HD or FX HD. The average subscriber has probably never heard of or visited this site. The technology driven individuals who make this site go aren't even close to the majority of Dish's subscribers. If they were, this turn of events for Voom would look a lot different.
Although the feedback from those who frequent this site is of great value to the management at Dish, your input does not make or break the company. The bottom line is dollars, because as stated before, DISH is a publicly owned company. If price were no object, Voom could be kept on Dish because theoretically no one would care that their bill is 5-10 dollars higher per month because Dish kept Voom and then added a large number of highly recognizable HD channels.
To steal a movie line, what the American public doesn't know makes them the American public. Charlie 'gets' the fact that when a network calls themself Yada Network HD that
most people believe they're getting HD. So regardless of whether or not the content they are watching is in HD, most Americans believe they are watching HD. And they would rather be watching 'HD' on a TBS or TNT, than HD on Voom Movies.
That's more than my two cents worth, but I will completely agree with the posters out there who are completely hacked off about the
manner in which this change was made. If should have been announced
way ahead of the day when it was supposed to occur, and not performed like a thief in the night. But from a profit standpoint this was a very smart move. One less multiple channel provider, means more recognizable channels for the same money.
Thank you for the forum...
