Reply from WLVT PBS39 re DirecTV

[bierkenstock]

Yesterday afternoon I received the following email from DirecTV.
<blockquote>Statement Regarding Directv

On July 13, 2005, WLVT sent Directv a letter regarding "Mandatory Carriage Election" pursuant to section 338 of the Communications Act of 1934. This letter communicated our wishes to be carried in the Philadelphia DMA by Directv. (see attachment 1)The July 13th date is significant considering Directv set an October 1st, 2005 deadline to receive any such communication regarding "must-carry."

On December 28th, 2005, WLVT was notified via FedEx that Directv never received any communication from WLVT regarding retransmission consent. Therefore, "Directv does not have any obligation to continue carriage of WLVT-TV." (see attachment 2)

On December 29th, 2005, Dan LaBert, Senior Director of Technology and Strategic Partnerships for WLVT contacted Bob Gabrielli, Senior Vice President of Programming Operations & Distribution for Directv. Contact was made first by leaving a voicemail with Gabrielli's office and then followed up with by sending an email. (see attachment 3)

In that message, LaBert communicated "It would be a disservice to the viewers of the Philadelphia DMA and the subscribers of DirecTV for this not to be worked out," and that "WLVT responded for carriage request by Directv on July 13th, 2005." A .pdf copy of the letter was attached to the email.

Bob Gabrielli did return our message that same day and spoke with Dan LaBert. Gabrielli stated that Directv sent out their communication on 12/28/2005 to give stations adequate time to respond just in case there were any glitches in the system. Gabrielli questioned why Directv did not receive WLVT's letter but then opened the previously sent email that contained a copy of WLVT's July 13th communication to Directv. While on still on the phone with LaBert, Gabrielli stated "well there must be in a glitch in our system. Everything looks ok on this letter. I will walk down to our legal department and get it taken care of. I will then follow back up with you letter this afternoon." Except, WLVT has yet to hear back from Directv regarding this issue.

On December 31st at 12:00 AM, WLVT was dropped from Directv's channel line-up.

Despite numerous phone calls, voice mails and emails to Directv's corporate office in El Segundo, California, WLVT has still yet to be contacted by Directv.

WLVT's signal did return to Directv on Tuesday, January 3rd but was once again dropped on Wednesday January 4th. We have been given no reason why our signal was dropped a second time.

WLVT deeply regrets any inconvenience to our viewers resulting from Directv's decision to drop our signal station. We renewed our intentions with Directv on July 13, 2005 and Directv failed to process the request. We are working feverishly to resolve this issue.</blockquote>
The attachments referred to are pdf files showing copies of the station's correspondence with DirecTV.

It sounds like DirecTV is using loop-holes in the law to give them an excuse to dump "marginal" channels. I have no idea what would cause them to want to do this since each channel they drop (and from posts on other boards it appears DirecTV has dropped channels in other markets), they crease dissatisfied customers. Is their some operating cost associated with these channels and they want to save money? Do they wish to save bandwidth (possibly in order to run more Direct Ticket and PPV Events or shopping channels that bring in money)? Or are some corporate types just being bureaucratic and hard-assed.

If you are a DirecTV subscriber, I urge you to email them. Even if you did not watch channel 39, your channel may be next (WFMZ 69, NJN 23, WYBE 35, Pax 61, Univision, TeleMundo ...).

 

[pab]

It probably is a wish to save bandwidth. The sheer number of channels they've been dropping in several markets would point to that.

Philadelphia's and New York's (along with Chicago, Houston, Boston, and about 10 other markets) local channels are currently on the bird at 101 degrees, the ONLY satellite every known piece of DirecTV hardware can see. And while some markets use "spot beaming" to share transponder space since their signals don't need to be seen elsewhere, the original batch of locals (including Philly) does not; they take up transponder space across the country. If you moved to, say, Colorado, and never told DirecTV you weren't in the Philadelphia DMA any more, you could still get the Philly locals.

This is just one more example of how the new, Fox-ruled, regime at DirecTV are slipping. First there was the decision to drop TiVo, then preparations for the switchover to MPEG-4 which will make all our equipment obsolote, now this. The minute TiVo puts out their cablecard HD box, I'm gone.
<P ID="signature">______________
The Pab Sungenis Project - http://www.lowbudgetradio.com</P>

 

[bierkenstock]

In fairness, they do have an equivalent TiVo replacement product.

I stay with DirecTV (for now) because DirecTivo (DirecTV's DVR) are the only boxes that can record two shows at once. Stand-alone TiVo's can not - and it seems the networks tend to schedule one show I want to catch against another show I want to catch. Unless this new TiVo product can also record two shows at once, forget it.

I don't much like Fox. I like Comcast even less. Unlike DirecTV, Comcast did not go fully digital. They have some bastardized system in which there is the original analog tier and then newer digital service on top of it. Picture quality on the analog tier sucks - especially on broadcast channels. As noted previously, I think Comcast keeping the sports channel away from satellite is a petty, nasty way to do business.


>
> This is just one more example of how the new, Fox-ruled,
> regime at DirecTV are slipping. First there was the
> decision to drop TiVo, then preparations for the switchover
> to MPEG-4 which will make all our equipment obsolote, now
> this. The minute TiVo puts out their cablecard HD box, I'm
> gone.
>

 

[pab]

> In fairness, they do have an equivalent TiVo replacement
> product.

No, they don't. I've looked at the R15, and it's a poor replacement. It wouldn't exist if Rupert Murdoch didn't own the company that created it.

> I stay with DirecTV (for now) because DirecTivo (DirecTV's
> DVR) are the only boxes that can record two shows at once.
> Stand-alone TiVo's can not - and it seems the networks tend
> to schedule one show I want to catch against another show I
> want to catch. Unless this new TiVo product can also record
> two shows at once, forget it.

Yes, the cablecard TiVo will have dual tuners.

Yes, Comcast has a bastardized hybrid system, but the great thing is I won't need the analog tier at all. I'll get the Philadelphia OTA HD stations just fine, and the premium channels are on the digital tier.
<P ID="signature">______________
The Pab Sungenis Project - http://www.lowbudgetradio.com</P>

 

[r566]

> It probably is a wish to save bandwidth. The sheer number
> of channels they've been dropping in several markets would
> point to that.
>
> Philadelphia's and New York's (along with Chicago, Houston,
> Boston, and about 10 other markets) local channels are
> currently on the bird at 101 degrees, the ONLY satellite
> every known piece of DirecTV hardware can see. And while
> some markets use "spot beaming" to share transponder space
> since their signals don't need to be seen elsewhere, the
> original batch of locals (including Philly) does not;

Actually, the Philadelphia locals ARE spotbeamed, and share 2 spotbeams along with all the several NY market channels except for 2,4,5,7. The latter NY stations are used for national distant network signals as well as NY locals.

The only space they are saving, that could be re-used by this, would be for Salisbury, MD locals. Harrisburg and Scranton are carried already, and there is no other market nearby (within same spotbeam coverage area) elsewhere not already carried, unless there is plan to shift some Harrisburg and Scranton stations around. Baltimore, D.C. and Harrisburg are on another spotbeam, but both spotbeams overlap in the Mid-Atlantic area.

There are some savings, of course, in dropping unwanted local channels(like WMCN). Probably less use of equipment, lower electric bill, or something trivial, but miserly on DirecTV's part. WLVT was different enough from WHYY, to warrant it to be carried still.

Unfortunately if both sides present to the FCC, DirecTV might use the duplicateness card, as they already carry WHYY, NJN and WYBE in the Phila. locals, and WLVT is the fourth NCE, but substantial in overlap to WHYY's programming.

they
> take up transponder space across the country. If you moved
> to, say, Colorado, and never told DirecTV you weren't in the
> Philadelphia DMA any more, you could still get the Philly
> locals.
>
> This is just one more example of how the new, Fox-ruled,
> regime at DirecTV are slipping. First there was the
> decision to drop TiVo, then preparations for the switchover
> to MPEG-4 which will make all our equipment obsolote, now
> this. The minute TiVo puts out their cablecard HD box, I'm
> gone.
>

 

[bierkenstock]

REPLY FROM DIRECTV

DirecTV Customer Service:
<blockquote>Thanks for writing. I'm sorry for the disappointment the changes to the locals may have caused you. As part of the federal Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act (SHVIA), a station must notify us in writing if they wish to continue to be carried. Because WLVT let the deadline pass without notifying us, we presumed they no longer required the slot and re-assigned the satellite bandwidth we had dedicated to them to another station, so it is no longer available for us to put them back on the air. We regret any inconvenience this is causing our customers.</blockquote>

WLVT says they did write and ask to be carried (and included a copy of the letter dated July 13th). DirecTV says they did not. Curiously, DirecTV said nothing to WLVT untl December 28th (one business day before DirecTV pulled the plug) even though the deadline was the end of October. WLVT does not say whether they sent their letter via FedEx or Registered Mail which give them proof of mailing and proof of delivery. Maybe they decided to save a few cents and send the letter regular mail. Maybe DirecTV did not get the letter. We know how the mail is. (Thank you, Cliff Clavin; thank you, Newman). Or maybe DirecTV lied.

Ironically, I first got DirecTV when I mail the payment for my cable bill and the cable company did not get it and the cable company cut me off. Then a very rude woman called and I told her to forget it (or words to that effect). Then they got my check and some guy called back all apologetic. I had already signed up for DirecTV (then owned by Hughes) and told the guy it was too late. The post office giveth; the post office taketh away.

I went and checked out Dish's website. For some reason, they don't carry channel 39 either but otherwise looks like a better deal.

 

[r566]

Re: REPLY FROM DIRECTV

> DirecTV Customer Service:
> Thanks for writing. I'm sorry for the disappointment the
> changes to the locals may have caused you. As part of the
> federal Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act (SHVIA), a
> station must notify us in writing if they wish to continue
> to be carried. Because WLVT let the deadline pass without
> notifying us, we presumed they no longer required the slot
> and re-assigned the satellite bandwidth we had dedicated to
> them to another station, so it is no longer available for us
> to put them back on the air. We regret any inconvenience
> this is causing our customers.
>
> WLVT says they did write and ask to be carried (and included
> a copy of the letter dated July 13th). DirecTV says they
> did not. Curiously, DirecTV said nothing to WLVT untl
> December 28th (one business day before DirecTV pulled the
> plug) even though the deadline was the end of October. WLVT
> does not say whether they sent their letter via FedEx or
> Registered Mail which give them proof of mailing and proof
> of delivery. Maybe they decided to save a few cents and
> send the letter regular mail. Maybe DirecTV did not get the
> letter. We know how the mail is. (Thank you, Cliff Clavin;
> thank you, Newman). Or maybe DirecTV lied.
>
> Ironically, I first got DirecTV when I mail the payment for
> my cable bill and the cable company did not get it and the
> cable company cut me off. Then a very rude woman called and
> I told her to forget it (or words to that effect). Then
> they got my check and some guy called back all apologetic.
> I had already signed up for DirecTV (then owned by Hughes)
> and told the guy it was too late. The post office giveth;
> the post office taketh away.
>
> I went and checked out Dish's website. For some reason,
> they don't carry channel 39 either but otherwise looks like
> a better deal.
>

I know Dish's point of presence was in Southern NJ (Pennsauken), and WLVT won't cross over the border, so WLVT only tried for DirecTV carriage. DirecTV's point of presence was on the PA side, in Philadelphia. DirecTV used to be far more cooperative also, where Dish rejected WLVT off bat, and put marginal stations on a second sat location. WLVT was added to DirecTV after WFMZ.

Being in Southern NJ, I'm not in WLVT's actual coverage area, but it was nice DirecTV carried them, as an alternative to WHYY. I can get WFMZ-DT, but not WLVT-DT.

So, DirecTV sucks for dropping the station (poor choice),
and WLVT, a secondary PBS, dropped the ball also.

WLVT shows Charlie Rose earlier and carries more of PBS main lineup.

WNET would have been nicer, just like lot of things from NY, but we have to live with what we got, and WLVT was nice for the time it was on DirecTV.