Ask a question
Search in U-verse Forums

U-verse Forums

Reply
Posted Aug 11, 2014
3:55:50 PM
View profile
Where is the Hallmark Channel?

I am new to At&t U verus. I was told when I signed up the Hallmark Channel was available.  It took me a week to finally realize you don't have it. Very misleading.

I am new to At&t U verus. I was told when I signed up the Hallmark Channel was available.  It took me a week to finally realize you don't have it. Very misleading.

Accepted Solution

Where is the Hallmark Channel?

64,839 views
786 replies
(2) Me too
(2) Me too
Reply
View all replies
(786)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 4, 2013 12:34:25 PM
0
(0)
Tutor

The last post about how big a companyATT/ Uverse is, is amusing considering the first posts talk about negotiating problem with Crown and ATT was because Crown wanted ATT to pay the big company fees and ATT felt they should pay the small company fees.  After almost 4 years, they hopefully are working behind the scenes to resolve this issue.

The last post about how big a companyATT/ Uverse is, is amusing considering the first posts talk about negotiating problem with Crown and ATT was because Crown wanted ATT to pay the big company fees and ATT felt they should pay the small company fees.  After almost 4 years, they hopefully are working behind the scenes to resolve this issue.

Re: hallmark

210 of 787 (2,096 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 4, 2013 7:52:09 PM
0
(0)
Scholar
toria writes, "After almost 4 years, they hopefully are working behind the scenes to resolve this issue."

Three years.

I don't imagine reaching agreement to return carriage of Hallmark Channel (SD and HD) and Hallmark Movie Channel (SD and HD) to AT&T U-verse is impossible. That it would be like trying to move a mountain.

I believe that AT&T U-verse was not intent on paying what it may have figured was too much being asked by Crown Media.

Three years later, Crown Media still has one less provider. And AT&T U-verse does rank among the Top 10 cable television providers in the U.S. in subscribers.

So what explains why Crown Media appears unwilling to step up, given it would seem Crown Media needs AT&T U-verse more than the reverse? I think something rather pathetic is the answer to that question.

People wanting Hallmark Channel and Hallmark Movie Channel back on the system of AT&T U-verse are reasonable. But for those new subscribers who claim to have just learned that the programming isn't carried, it is a mistake to sign up without being sufficiently informed in advance. (The channel lineups from any company are usually made available over the Internet.) As for those who have been upset for the three years the programming has not been carried, and that they have not dropped service, I think something else explains why they have stayed. What would explain that is that AT&T U-verse's 2010 losses of Hallmark Channel and Hallmark Movie Channel were not compelling enough to get those subscribers to cancel service.

I hope Hallmark Channel and Hallmark Movie Channel come back. I am tired of the topic. And I think it is reasonable to want these two back along with the many basic cable programmers that are routinely available from just about U.S. cable television system.

toria writes, "After almost 4 years, they hopefully are working behind the scenes to resolve this issue."

Three years.

I don't imagine reaching agreement to return carriage of Hallmark Channel (SD and HD) and Hallmark Movie Channel (SD and HD) to AT&T U-verse is impossible. That it would be like trying to move a mountain.

I believe that AT&T U-verse was not intent on paying what it may have figured was too much being asked by Crown Media.

Three years later, Crown Media still has one less provider. And AT&T U-verse does rank among the Top 10 cable television providers in the U.S. in subscribers.

So what explains why Crown Media appears unwilling to step up, given it would seem Crown Media needs AT&T U-verse more than the reverse? I think something rather pathetic is the answer to that question.

People wanting Hallmark Channel and Hallmark Movie Channel back on the system of AT&T U-verse are reasonable. But for those new subscribers who claim to have just learned that the programming isn't carried, it is a mistake to sign up without being sufficiently informed in advance. (The channel lineups from any company are usually made available over the Internet.) As for those who have been upset for the three years the programming has not been carried, and that they have not dropped service, I think something else explains why they have stayed. What would explain that is that AT&T U-verse's 2010 losses of Hallmark Channel and Hallmark Movie Channel were not compelling enough to get those subscribers to cancel service.

I hope Hallmark Channel and Hallmark Movie Channel come back. I am tired of the topic. And I think it is reasonable to want these two back along with the many basic cable programmers that are routinely available from just about U.S. cable television system.

Re: hallmark

211 of 787 (15,230 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 5, 2013 11:01:43 AM
0
(0)
Voyager
I love Me-TV and Hallmark Movie Channel. I love to watch Night Gallery, Thriller, Perry Mason on Me-TV, and Murder She Wrote on Hallmark Movie Channel, as well as their Christmas programming. I am with Time Warner Cable right now, I was trying to find out if AT&T carried these channel before I switch, I'm glad I checked!!!!
I love Me-TV and Hallmark Movie Channel. I love to watch Night Gallery, Thriller, Perry Mason on Me-TV, and Murder She Wrote on Hallmark Movie Channel, as well as their Christmas programming. I am with Time Warner Cable right now, I was trying to find out if AT&T carried these channel before I switch, I'm glad I checked!!!!

Re: hallmark

212 of 787 (15,188 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 5, 2013 11:02:30 AM
0
(0)
Voyager

I love Cedar Cove too!

I love Cedar Cove too!

Re: hallmark

213 of 787 (15,187 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 5, 2013 11:45:22 AM
0
(0)
Tutor
Edited by Copycat68 on Dec 5, 2013 at 7:00:40 PM

 

Do you really mean the shopping channels help lower my bill?????

I can honestly say that my bill has only gone up. It has never been lowered. If your statement about shopping channels were correct then that would add credence to those of us that would like the Hallmark channel returned to our Uverse service, AT&T could use some of that shopping channel lute to put it back on.

By the way how much did you see your monthly bill go down when they added the dozen or so of new shopping and advertising channels?

I just counted the shopping and advertising channels (not including the AT&T ones) - 54, 28 SD and 26 HD. I hope they can perfect the 3D shopping channels for next year. My bill will go down some more.

 

 

 

Do you really mean the shopping channels help lower my bill?????

I can honestly say that my bill has only gone up. It has never been lowered. If your statement about shopping channels were correct then that would add credence to those of us that would like the Hallmark channel returned to our Uverse service, AT&T could use some of that shopping channel lute to put it back on.

By the way how much did you see your monthly bill go down when they added the dozen or so of new shopping and advertising channels?

I just counted the shopping and advertising channels (not including the AT&T ones) - 54, 28 SD and 26 HD. I hope they can perfect the 3D shopping channels for next year. My bill will go down some more.

 

 

Re: hallmark

[ Edited ]
214 of 787 (15,182 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 5, 2013 11:54:19 AM
0
(0)
ACE - Expert

Okimamma wrote:
I love Me-TV and Hallmark Movie Channel. I love to watch Night Gallery, Thriller, Perry Mason on Me-TV, and Murder She Wrote on Hallmark Movie Channel, as well as their Christmas programming. I am with Time Warner Cable right now, I was trying to find out if AT&T carried these channel before I switch, I'm glad I checked!!!!

I'm glad you checked, too.  Actually, ME-TV is available on AT&T U-verse in some markets.

 


Okimamma wrote:
I love Me-TV and Hallmark Movie Channel. I love to watch Night Gallery, Thriller, Perry Mason on Me-TV, and Murder She Wrote on Hallmark Movie Channel, as well as their Christmas programming. I am with Time Warner Cable right now, I was trying to find out if AT&T carried these channel before I switch, I'm glad I checked!!!!

I'm glad you checked, too.  Actually, ME-TV is available on AT&T U-verse in some markets.

 

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

215 of 787 (15,182 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 5, 2013 12:06:06 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Expert

Copycat68 wrote:

 

Do you really mean the shopping channels help lower my bill?????

I can honestly say that my bill has only gone up. It has never been lowered. If your statement about shopping channels were correct then that would add credence to those of us that would like the Hallmark channel returned to our Uverse service, AT&T could use some of that shopping channel lute to put it back on.

By the way how much did you see your monthly bill go down when they added the dozen or so of new shopping and advertising channels?

 

 


I mean to say that AT&T has revenue targets like any other company.  If they don't meet them some other way, then they get more money from you and me to meet them.  Most of these shopping channels can be easily hidden from the guide and have exactly that much effect on me.

 

 


Copycat68 wrote:

 

Do you really mean the shopping channels help lower my bill?????

I can honestly say that my bill has only gone up. It has never been lowered. If your statement about shopping channels were correct then that would add credence to those of us that would like the Hallmark channel returned to our Uverse service, AT&T could use some of that shopping channel lute to put it back on.

By the way how much did you see your monthly bill go down when they added the dozen or so of new shopping and advertising channels?

 

 


I mean to say that AT&T has revenue targets like any other company.  If they don't meet them some other way, then they get more money from you and me to meet them.  Most of these shopping channels can be easily hidden from the guide and have exactly that much effect on me.

 

 

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

216 of 787 (15,182 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 5, 2013 12:43:07 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Professor

Compared to two years ago my current bill is much lower :-)

-------

Resident Xbox ACE. Ask me almost anything about Xbox on U-Verse.

Xbox Gamertag: americangame
PSN: americangame
Steam:americangame
When friending me mention that you found me on the AT&T forums.

Compared to two years ago my current bill is much lower :-)

-------

Resident Xbox ACE. Ask me almost anything about Xbox on U-Verse.

Xbox Gamertag: americangame
PSN: americangame
Steam:americangame
When friending me mention that you found me on the AT&T forums.
*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

217 of 787 (15,172 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 5, 2013 12:43:53 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Master
Edited by dhascall on Dec 5, 2013 at 12:44:53 PM

Copycat68 wrote:

 

Do you really mean the shopping channels help lower my bill?????

I can honestly say that my bill has only gone up. It has never been lowered. If your statement about shopping channels were correct then that would add credence to those of us that would like the Hallmark channel returned to our Uverse service, AT&T could use some of that shopping channel lute to put it back on.

By the way how much did you see your monthly bill go down when they added the dozen or so of new shopping and advertising channels?

 

 


What cable company has lowered their bills?  I will say that between Comcast and U-Verse, my bill has gone up less (and less often) and "retentions" will offer more to keep existing customers.

 

As far as Hallmark, my wife misses them - if it's important to her - it's important to me.    I keep plugging to get them back.  Against all odds, lol.

 


Copycat68 wrote:

 

Do you really mean the shopping channels help lower my bill?????

I can honestly say that my bill has only gone up. It has never been lowered. If your statement about shopping channels were correct then that would add credence to those of us that would like the Hallmark channel returned to our Uverse service, AT&T could use some of that shopping channel lute to put it back on.

By the way how much did you see your monthly bill go down when they added the dozen or so of new shopping and advertising channels?

 

 


What cable company has lowered their bills?  I will say that between Comcast and U-Verse, my bill has gone up less (and less often) and "retentions" will offer more to keep existing customers.

 

As far as Hallmark, my wife misses them - if it's important to her - it's important to me.    I keep plugging to get them back.  Against all odds, lol.

 

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

[ Edited ]
218 of 787 (15,172 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 5, 2013 12:59:17 PM
0
(0)
Expert
Edited by SomeJoe7777 on Dec 5, 2013 at 1:00:03 PM

toria55 wrote:

The last post about how big a companyATT/ Uverse is, is amusing considering the first posts talk about negotiating problem with Crown and ATT was because Crown wanted ATT to pay the big company fees and ATT felt they should pay the small company fees. 


 

There is not supposed to be any such thing as a "big company fee" or a "small company fee".  That is exactly the issue.

 

The fee is per subscriber per month.  So, hypothetically, if Hallmark wants 6 cents per subscriber per month, then with AT&T on U200 (about 5M subscribers), AT&T would have to pay $300,000 per month to carry the channel.  For DirecTV, with 15M subscribers, they pay 3 times as much.

 

The issue is that DirecTV, Dish, other cable providers, etc. were paying Crown Media (owners of Hallmark) a lot less per subscriber per month than Crown was demanding from AT&T.  How is that fair that AT&T has to pay more?  Thus AT&T dropped them.

 

How would you feel if Wal-Mart was selling Levi's blue jeans to everyone else for $19.95, but demanded that you pay $29.95?  You'd tell them to go sit and spin too ...

 

 


toria55 wrote:

The last post about how big a companyATT/ Uverse is, is amusing considering the first posts talk about negotiating problem with Crown and ATT was because Crown wanted ATT to pay the big company fees and ATT felt they should pay the small company fees. 


 

There is not supposed to be any such thing as a "big company fee" or a "small company fee".  That is exactly the issue.

 

The fee is per subscriber per month.  So, hypothetically, if Hallmark wants 6 cents per subscriber per month, then with AT&T on U200 (about 5M subscribers), AT&T would have to pay $300,000 per month to carry the channel.  For DirecTV, with 15M subscribers, they pay 3 times as much.

 

The issue is that DirecTV, Dish, other cable providers, etc. were paying Crown Media (owners of Hallmark) a lot less per subscriber per month than Crown was demanding from AT&T.  How is that fair that AT&T has to pay more?  Thus AT&T dropped them.

 

How would you feel if Wal-Mart was selling Levi's blue jeans to everyone else for $19.95, but demanded that you pay $29.95?  You'd tell them to go sit and spin too ...

 

 

Re: hallmark

[ Edited ]
219 of 787 (15,168 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 5, 2013 2:40:40 PM
0
(0)
Employee
Edited by my thoughts on Dec 5, 2013 at 2:44:52 PM

I too, would like to see this come to a conclusion, my thoughts, place Hallmark on HD Premium Tier with Sony Movie Channel, requiring the $10 HD fee plus $7 Premium Tier Fee for those on u200 and above (sorry ufamily subscribers will need to upgrade).

Those willing to spend the extra they can, UVerse not paying $300,000 per month for all subscribers to not watch.

This to me seems a win all around, but .....

I too, would like to see this come to a conclusion, my thoughts, place Hallmark on HD Premium Tier with Sony Movie Channel, requiring the $10 HD fee plus $7 Premium Tier Fee for those on u200 and above (sorry ufamily subscribers will need to upgrade).

Those willing to spend the extra they can, UVerse not paying $300,000 per month for all subscribers to not watch.

This to me seems a win all around, but .....

*I am an AT&T employee and the postings on this site are my own and don’t necessarily represent AT&T’s position, strategies or opinions.

Re: hallmark

[ Edited ]
220 of 787 (15,138 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 5, 2013 4:55:18 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Expert

I doubt Crown will accept the correspondingly lower number of subscribers at the offered price, so they'd want yet more money per subscriber.

 

 

I doubt Crown will accept the correspondingly lower number of subscribers at the offered price, so they'd want yet more money per subscriber.

 

 

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

221 of 787 (15,131 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 5, 2013 7:12:23 PM
0
(0)
Expert

JefferMC wrote:

I doubt Crown will accept the correspondingly lower number of subscribers at the offered price, so they'd want yet more money per subscriber.


 

Why not?  It's revenue, and additional audience for advertisers.

 

The answer to this whole thing is the elimination of these 1-to-1 negotiations between content providers and content distributors.  The content should be traded on an open market just like commodities futures, and any content distributor can buy it at the market price.

 

If DirecTV goes to the market and buys June 2014 delivery of Hallmark for 6 cents/subscriber, every other provider should be able to buy it at the same price.

 

If Fox Sports Southwest loses coverage of the Astros and Rockets, the price for future delivery of the channel would drop sharply because providers wouldn't buy it at the former price.

 

If customer tastes for programming change, channel pricing should change accordingly because of increasing or decreasing demand.

 

 


JefferMC wrote:

I doubt Crown will accept the correspondingly lower number of subscribers at the offered price, so they'd want yet more money per subscriber.


 

Why not?  It's revenue, and additional audience for advertisers.

 

The answer to this whole thing is the elimination of these 1-to-1 negotiations between content providers and content distributors.  The content should be traded on an open market just like commodities futures, and any content distributor can buy it at the market price.

 

If DirecTV goes to the market and buys June 2014 delivery of Hallmark for 6 cents/subscriber, every other provider should be able to buy it at the same price.

 

If Fox Sports Southwest loses coverage of the Astros and Rockets, the price for future delivery of the channel would drop sharply because providers wouldn't buy it at the former price.

 

If customer tastes for programming change, channel pricing should change accordingly because of increasing or decreasing demand.

 

 

Re: hallmark

222 of 787 (15,115 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 5, 2013 7:28:58 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Professor

SomeJoe7777 wrote:

JefferMC wrote:

I doubt Crown will accept the correspondingly lower number of subscribers at the offered price, so they'd want yet more money per subscriber.


 

Why not?  It's revenue, and additional audience for advertisers.

 

The answer to this whole thing is the elimination of these 1-to-1 negotiations between content providers and content distributors.  The content should be traded on an open market just like commodities futures, and any content distributor can buy it at the market price.

 

If DirecTV goes to the market and buys June 2014 delivery of Hallmark for 6 cents/subscriber, every other provider should be able to buy it at the same price.

 

If Fox Sports Southwest loses coverage of the Astros and Rockets, the price for future delivery of the channel would drop sharply because providers wouldn't buy it at the former price.

 

If customer tastes for programming change, channel pricing should change accordingly because of increasing or decreasing demand.

 

 


In my opinion, doing something like that would sharply drop the price of ESPN.

-------

Resident Xbox ACE. Ask me almost anything about Xbox on U-Verse.

Xbox Gamertag: americangame
PSN: americangame
Steam:americangame
When friending me mention that you found me on the AT&T forums.

SomeJoe7777 wrote:

JefferMC wrote:

I doubt Crown will accept the correspondingly lower number of subscribers at the offered price, so they'd want yet more money per subscriber.


 

Why not?  It's revenue, and additional audience for advertisers.

 

The answer to this whole thing is the elimination of these 1-to-1 negotiations between content providers and content distributors.  The content should be traded on an open market just like commodities futures, and any content distributor can buy it at the market price.

 

If DirecTV goes to the market and buys June 2014 delivery of Hallmark for 6 cents/subscriber, every other provider should be able to buy it at the same price.

 

If Fox Sports Southwest loses coverage of the Astros and Rockets, the price for future delivery of the channel would drop sharply because providers wouldn't buy it at the former price.

 

If customer tastes for programming change, channel pricing should change accordingly because of increasing or decreasing demand.

 

 


In my opinion, doing something like that would sharply drop the price of ESPN.

-------

Resident Xbox ACE. Ask me almost anything about Xbox on U-Verse.

Xbox Gamertag: americangame
PSN: americangame
Steam:americangame
When friending me mention that you found me on the AT&T forums.
*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

223 of 787 (15,109 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 5, 2013 7:59:19 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Expert

SomeJoe7777 wrote:

JefferMC wrote:

I doubt Crown will accept the correspondingly lower number of subscribers at the offered price, so they'd want yet more money per subscriber.


 

Why not?  It's revenue, and additional audience for advertisers.

 

...


Because if it were that simple, the deal would have been done years ago.

 

What great seismic shift do you foresee that would get the sides to move to such a marketplace?

 


SomeJoe7777 wrote:

JefferMC wrote:

I doubt Crown will accept the correspondingly lower number of subscribers at the offered price, so they'd want yet more money per subscriber.


 

Why not?  It's revenue, and additional audience for advertisers.

 

...


Because if it were that simple, the deal would have been done years ago.

 

What great seismic shift do you foresee that would get the sides to move to such a marketplace?

 

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

224 of 787 (15,101 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 6, 2013 5:57:42 AM
0
(0)
Expert
I think several factors make a market concept more possible now that it used to be:

1. Smaller content providers are being pushed out of the market because distributors won't pay their demanded price. Some of those content providers might like a market concept because it lets them get more subscribers.

2. There are many more distributors now. It's not just the big cable and satellite companies, but smaller providers have entered the marketplace. If IPTV delivery becomes commonplace (which it's moving towards), virtually anyone could have a small distribution company. Hotels, restaurants, etc. could each become their own mini-distributor, and buy only the channels that they need for their business in the marketplace.

3. Congress and associated representatives are beginning to notice the constant arguments and dropping of channels that's happening more and more frequently now. If something doesn't change, the threat of additional regulation looms. Content providers and content distributors would be wise to implement such a marketplace on their own to avoid that.

4. Part of the overall problem is an issue that has become more and more prevalent throughout the US: No one wants to understand or pay for the true cost of an item anymore. You say that Hallmark should charge a smaller provider more, while I say the cost per subscriber should remain fixed. Why does Hallmark think that a smaller provider should pay more? Volume discount really doesn't apply here because there is no cost savings to the provider with scale. This isn't a manufacturing line with widgets ... the content is already created and already exists. If Hallmark has priced the content correctly, costs are already covered, and anything additional from more providers is simply profit.

If costs aren't covered yet, then what that means is that Hallmark priced the content too low in the first place or has failed to control overhead. Either way, there is a disconnect between what Hallmark thinks the content costs them and what the true cost is, and they are either unable to unwilling to see that.

Another (non-TV industry) example is gasoline taxes. Gas taxes fund the maintenance of highways, roads, bridges, public transportation, etc. Total cost of those items nationwide was about $52B last year, but because people are driving less and driving more fuel efficient cars, total revenue from gas taxes was only about $41B, an $11B shortfall. Obviously, the answer is to raise revenue by raising the per-gallon tax, but nobody wants to hear it. People have trained themselves to ignore the true cost of their luxuries. The true cost of driving a car includes paying for the road maintenance but people stick their fingers in their ears on "principles" like "smaller government and lower taxes".

The bottom line is that these days, everyone wants to enjoy the items and nobody wants to pay for them. THAT is the true reason we deficit spend.
I think several factors make a market concept more possible now that it used to be:

1. Smaller content providers are being pushed out of the market because distributors won't pay their demanded price. Some of those content providers might like a market concept because it lets them get more subscribers.

2. There are many more distributors now. It's not just the big cable and satellite companies, but smaller providers have entered the marketplace. If IPTV delivery becomes commonplace (which it's moving towards), virtually anyone could have a small distribution company. Hotels, restaurants, etc. could each become their own mini-distributor, and buy only the channels that they need for their business in the marketplace.

3. Congress and associated representatives are beginning to notice the constant arguments and dropping of channels that's happening more and more frequently now. If something doesn't change, the threat of additional regulation looms. Content providers and content distributors would be wise to implement such a marketplace on their own to avoid that.

4. Part of the overall problem is an issue that has become more and more prevalent throughout the US: No one wants to understand or pay for the true cost of an item anymore. You say that Hallmark should charge a smaller provider more, while I say the cost per subscriber should remain fixed. Why does Hallmark think that a smaller provider should pay more? Volume discount really doesn't apply here because there is no cost savings to the provider with scale. This isn't a manufacturing line with widgets ... the content is already created and already exists. If Hallmark has priced the content correctly, costs are already covered, and anything additional from more providers is simply profit.

If costs aren't covered yet, then what that means is that Hallmark priced the content too low in the first place or has failed to control overhead. Either way, there is a disconnect between what Hallmark thinks the content costs them and what the true cost is, and they are either unable to unwilling to see that.

Another (non-TV industry) example is gasoline taxes. Gas taxes fund the maintenance of highways, roads, bridges, public transportation, etc. Total cost of those items nationwide was about $52B last year, but because people are driving less and driving more fuel efficient cars, total revenue from gas taxes was only about $41B, an $11B shortfall. Obviously, the answer is to raise revenue by raising the per-gallon tax, but nobody wants to hear it. People have trained themselves to ignore the true cost of their luxuries. The true cost of driving a car includes paying for the road maintenance but people stick their fingers in their ears on "principles" like "smaller government and lower taxes".

The bottom line is that these days, everyone wants to enjoy the items and nobody wants to pay for them. THAT is the true reason we deficit spend.

Re: hallmark

225 of 787 (15,076 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 6, 2013 6:34:27 AM
0
(0)
ACE - Master

This whole Hallmark discussion makes me think of a messy divorce and the customers are the kids. 

 

Dr. skeeter will now answer your questions:

 

1.  Why are they parting ways?  Well, kiddies, sometimes relationships end and it's just best to shut it down.

 

2.  Why can't they work something out?  Both parties want what they want and it doesn't look like they can come to an amicable compromise.

 

3.  But we're the ones who are suffering.  We know but that's life but you need to put on your big boy/girl panties and deal with it.

 

4.  Why did you have to go and mess up a good thing?  LIfe happens and you'll survive.  You might not like it but you'll survive.

 

5.  Will we ever see you again?  Of course, but only if you have a friend with Dish or Direct TV or other cable provider.

 

You can stomp your feet and pout all day long and if you want to run away (leave Uverse), you can do that but just know that it's not going to change anything.

 

 

 

 

*note to self: I gotta stop watching so much Dr. Phil.

 

 

 

 

 

This whole Hallmark discussion makes me think of a messy divorce and the customers are the kids. 

 

Dr. skeeter will now answer your questions:

 

1.  Why are they parting ways?  Well, kiddies, sometimes relationships end and it's just best to shut it down.

 

2.  Why can't they work something out?  Both parties want what they want and it doesn't look like they can come to an amicable compromise.

 

3.  But we're the ones who are suffering.  We know but that's life but you need to put on your big boy/girl panties and deal with it.

 

4.  Why did you have to go and mess up a good thing?  LIfe happens and you'll survive.  You might not like it but you'll survive.

 

5.  Will we ever see you again?  Of course, but only if you have a friend with Dish or Direct TV or other cable provider.

 

You can stomp your feet and pout all day long and if you want to run away (leave Uverse), you can do that but just know that it's not going to change anything.

 

 

 

 

*note to self: I gotta stop watching so much Dr. Phil.

 

 

 

 

 

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

226 of 787 (15,076 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 6, 2013 1:33:55 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Master
Edited by dhascall on Dec 6, 2013 at 1:35:03 PM

skeeterintexas wrote:

This whole Hallmark discussion makes me think of a messy divorce and the customers are the kids. 

 

 

 

5.  Will we ever see you again?  Of course, but only if you have a friend with Dish or Direct TV or other cable provider.

 

What Dr. Skeeter meant is Dish, Direct or any other major provider.  Just not U-Verse. Smiley Very Happy

 

She also failed to answer #6 "Are ego's involved?"  The answer is yes, one or both parties had their ego bruised and picked up their marbles and sulked away, in disgust. 

 

 


skeeterintexas wrote:

This whole Hallmark discussion makes me think of a messy divorce and the customers are the kids. 

 

 

 

5.  Will we ever see you again?  Of course, but only if you have a friend with Dish or Direct TV or other cable provider.

 

What Dr. Skeeter meant is Dish, Direct or any other major provider.  Just not U-Verse. Smiley Very Happy

 

She also failed to answer #6 "Are ego's involved?"  The answer is yes, one or both parties had their ego bruised and picked up their marbles and sulked away, in disgust. 

 

 

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

[ Edited ]
227 of 787 (15,042 Views)
Highlighted
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 6, 2013 3:24:33 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Master

dhascall wrote:

 

What Dr. Skeeter meant is Dish, Direct or any other major provider.  Just not U-Verse. Smiley Very Happy

 

She also failed to answer #6 "Are ego's involved?"  The answer is yes, one or both parties had their ego bruised and picked up their marbles and sulked away, in disgust. 

 


EGO can definetly be a big problem in any relationship!


dhascall wrote:

 

What Dr. Skeeter meant is Dish, Direct or any other major provider.  Just not U-Verse. Smiley Very Happy

 

She also failed to answer #6 "Are ego's involved?"  The answer is yes, one or both parties had their ego bruised and picked up their marbles and sulked away, in disgust. 

 


EGO can definetly be a big problem in any relationship!

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

228 of 787 (15,028 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 7, 2013 8:53:50 AM
0
(0)
ACE - Professor
Between the thread that was shut down, this thread and the numerous others, I cannot believe there are this many unique individuals who would blindly sign up for AT&T without checking the channel lineup. Does Comcast, DirecTV, Time Warner, whoever else have the same issue? I would hope these people would research neighborhood issues (crime, city parks, grocery store locations, etc.) before moving. Do they look at TV issues (Plasma vs LCD, Sony vs whoever, etc) before dropping several hundred on a TV? I am quite sure that AT&T stores and AT&T representatives have current channel lineup cards that are given to new customers... I know I got one.
Between the thread that was shut down, this thread and the numerous others, I cannot believe there are this many unique individuals who would blindly sign up for AT&T without checking the channel lineup. Does Comcast, DirecTV, Time Warner, whoever else have the same issue? I would hope these people would research neighborhood issues (crime, city parks, grocery store locations, etc.) before moving. Do they look at TV issues (Plasma vs LCD, Sony vs whoever, etc) before dropping several hundred on a TV? I am quite sure that AT&T stores and AT&T representatives have current channel lineup cards that are given to new customers... I know I got one.
*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

229 of 787 (14,983 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 7, 2013 10:11:46 AM
0
(0)
Scholar
Edited by LoveHD on Dec 7, 2013 at 10:17:02 AM

baseballisback writes, "Between the thread that was shut down, this thread and the numerous others, I cannot believe there are this many unique individuals who would blindly sign up for AT&T without checking the channel lineup."

 

I can.

 

Many people switching to a different company to provide cable television programming assume a sameness. ("They're all the same!") Particular companies are identified for a specialty in what may be exclusivity of some unique programming (like NFL Sunday Ticket with DirecTV). But when it comes to full-service programmers like that from basic cable—CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, MTV, VH1, CMT, BET, WGN America, FX, Comedy Central, TBS, TNT, Turner Classic Movies, AMC, E!, Bravo, USA Network, Syfy, Nickelodeon, Cartoon Network, Disney, Discovery, TLC, Animal Planet, A&E, History Channel, National Geographic Channel, HGTV, Food Network, Travel Channel, Lifetime, Lifetime Movie Network, etc.—there is an assumption by many who figure that every provider naturally has all the essential programmers.

 

That is how the mistake would be made by those who did not check the programming lineup, to see no Hallmark Channel and/or Hallmark Movie Channel, in advance to signing up for AT&T U-verse.

 

I want AT&T U-verse and Crown Media to reach agreement—finally!—with returning the programming to the lineup. There has to be some pathetic, behind-the-scenes reason[s] for why Hallmark Channel (SD/HD) and Hallmark Movie Channel (SD/HD) have not been returned. (I'm tired of the topic.)

baseballisback writes, "Between the thread that was shut down, this thread and the numerous others, I cannot believe there are this many unique individuals who would blindly sign up for AT&T without checking the channel lineup."

 

I can.

 

Many people switching to a different company to provide cable television programming assume a sameness. ("They're all the same!") Particular companies are identified for a specialty in what may be exclusivity of some unique programming (like NFL Sunday Ticket with DirecTV). But when it comes to full-service programmers like that from basic cable—CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, MTV, VH1, CMT, BET, WGN America, FX, Comedy Central, TBS, TNT, Turner Classic Movies, AMC, E!, Bravo, USA Network, Syfy, Nickelodeon, Cartoon Network, Disney, Discovery, TLC, Animal Planet, A&E, History Channel, National Geographic Channel, HGTV, Food Network, Travel Channel, Lifetime, Lifetime Movie Network, etc.—there is an assumption by many who figure that every provider naturally has all the essential programmers.

 

That is how the mistake would be made by those who did not check the programming lineup, to see no Hallmark Channel and/or Hallmark Movie Channel, in advance to signing up for AT&T U-verse.

 

I want AT&T U-verse and Crown Media to reach agreement—finally!—with returning the programming to the lineup. There has to be some pathetic, behind-the-scenes reason[s] for why Hallmark Channel (SD/HD) and Hallmark Movie Channel (SD/HD) have not been returned. (I'm tired of the topic.)

Re: hallmark

[ Edited ]
230 of 787 (14,971 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 7, 2013 11:13:52 AM
0
(0)
ACE - Professor

This Hallmark thread will eventually become as large as the old one from 2010 that was finally shut down. What the people who are upset with U-Verse do not realize is that no matter how many posts or threats they make to leave U-Verse , nothing will change as a result.

 

AT&T is completely aware that there are subscribers who would like to have the Hallmark channels back. It isn't as if AT&T is surprised at this point by all of the posts after three years and three months.

 


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.

Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.

This Hallmark thread will eventually become as large as the old one from 2010 that was finally shut down. What the people who are upset with U-Verse do not realize is that no matter how many posts or threats they make to leave U-Verse , nothing will change as a result.

 

AT&T is completely aware that there are subscribers who would like to have the Hallmark channels back. It isn't as if AT&T is surprised at this point by all of the posts after three years and three months.

 


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.

Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.
*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

231 of 787 (14,959 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 7, 2013 4:30:19 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Master

dwinth wrote:

This Hallmark thread will eventually become as large as the old one from 2010 that was finally shut down. What the people who are upset with U-Verse do not realize is that no matter how many posts or threats they make to leave U-Verse , nothing will change as a result.

 

AT&T is completely aware that there are subscribers who would like to have the Hallmark channels back. It isn't as if AT&T is surprised at this point by all of the posts after three years and three months.

 


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.


There really aren't that many different posters in these threads, it's usually 1 new post and 5 or six of us regulars responding.

 

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway

dwinth wrote:

This Hallmark thread will eventually become as large as the old one from 2010 that was finally shut down. What the people who are upset with U-Verse do not realize is that no matter how many posts or threats they make to leave U-Verse , nothing will change as a result.

 

AT&T is completely aware that there are subscribers who would like to have the Hallmark channels back. It isn't as if AT&T is surprised at this point by all of the posts after three years and three months.

 


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.


There really aren't that many different posters in these threads, it's usually 1 new post and 5 or six of us regulars responding.

 

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway
*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

232 of 787 (14,937 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 8, 2013 5:50:53 AM
0
(0)
ACE - Professor

dwinth wrote:

This Hallmark thread will eventually become as large as the old one from 2010 that was finally shut down. What the people who are upset with U-Verse do not realize is that no matter how many posts or threats they make to leave U-Verse , nothing will change as a result.

 

AT&T is completely aware that there are subscribers who would like to have the Hallmark channels back. It isn't as if AT&T is surprised at this point by all of the posts after three years and three months.

 


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.


I've said it before and I'm sure I'll say it again: I was a retention Rep for Uverse in 2010. I cancelled more accounts during the Scripps-conflict weekend that November than during the 2 years between Hallmark's disappearance and my departure. 

 

Heck, I would almost think I cancelled more accounts because of the FS Midwest Cardinal's game disputes (which affected only a handful of Uverse markets) than because of Hallmark.


dwinth wrote:

This Hallmark thread will eventually become as large as the old one from 2010 that was finally shut down. What the people who are upset with U-Verse do not realize is that no matter how many posts or threats they make to leave U-Verse , nothing will change as a result.

 

AT&T is completely aware that there are subscribers who would like to have the Hallmark channels back. It isn't as if AT&T is surprised at this point by all of the posts after three years and three months.

 


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.


I've said it before and I'm sure I'll say it again: I was a retention Rep for Uverse in 2010. I cancelled more accounts during the Scripps-conflict weekend that November than during the 2 years between Hallmark's disappearance and my departure. 

 

Heck, I would almost think I cancelled more accounts because of the FS Midwest Cardinal's game disputes (which affected only a handful of Uverse markets) than because of Hallmark.

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

233 of 787 (14,900 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 8, 2013 7:26:58 AM
0
(0)
ACE - Professor

MicCheck wrote:

dwinth wrote:

This Hallmark thread will eventually become as large as the old one from 2010 that was finally shut down. What the people who are upset with U-Verse do not realize is that no matter how many posts or threats they make to leave U-Verse , nothing will change as a result.

 

AT&T is completely aware that there are subscribers who would like to have the Hallmark channels back. It isn't as if AT&T is surprised at this point by all of the posts after three years and three months.

 


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.


I've said it before and I'm sure I'll say it again: I was a retention Rep for Uverse in 2010. I cancelled more accounts during the Scripps-conflict weekend that November than during the 2 years between Hallmark's disappearance and my departure. 

 

Heck, I would almost think I cancelled more accounts because of the FS Midwest Cardinal's game disputes (which affected only a handful of Uverse markets) than because of Hallmark.


I am very surprised by your findings, but I will not dispute what you said since you were a retention representative for U-Verse for two years. What you found indicates how unimportant the Hallmark channels are to most U-Verse subscribers. It is the very small vocal minority that makes it sound otherwise.

 

I would imagine that some of those subscribers who left during the Scripps-AT&T conflict came back to U-Verse when the new carriage agreement was signed.

 


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.

Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.

MicCheck wrote:

dwinth wrote:

This Hallmark thread will eventually become as large as the old one from 2010 that was finally shut down. What the people who are upset with U-Verse do not realize is that no matter how many posts or threats they make to leave U-Verse , nothing will change as a result.

 

AT&T is completely aware that there are subscribers who would like to have the Hallmark channels back. It isn't as if AT&T is surprised at this point by all of the posts after three years and three months.

 


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.


I've said it before and I'm sure I'll say it again: I was a retention Rep for Uverse in 2010. I cancelled more accounts during the Scripps-conflict weekend that November than during the 2 years between Hallmark's disappearance and my departure. 

 

Heck, I would almost think I cancelled more accounts because of the FS Midwest Cardinal's game disputes (which affected only a handful of Uverse markets) than because of Hallmark.


I am very surprised by your findings, but I will not dispute what you said since you were a retention representative for U-Verse for two years. What you found indicates how unimportant the Hallmark channels are to most U-Verse subscribers. It is the very small vocal minority that makes it sound otherwise.

 

I would imagine that some of those subscribers who left during the Scripps-AT&T conflict came back to U-Verse when the new carriage agreement was signed.

 


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.

Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.
*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

234 of 787 (14,884 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 8, 2013 8:34:26 AM
0
(0)
Scholar

Hiding the shopping channels is like playing Whack-a-Mole. As soon as you hide one, two more pop up. They really are getting out of hand... It used to be that they were consolidated. Now, they are spread out everywhere except, of course, in the premiums.

 

 

Hiding the shopping channels is like playing Whack-a-Mole. As soon as you hide one, two more pop up. They really are getting out of hand... It used to be that they were consolidated. Now, they are spread out everywhere except, of course, in the premiums.

 

 

Re: hallmark

235 of 787 (14,875 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 9, 2013 3:33:34 AM
0
(0)
ACE - Professor

dwinth wrote:

MicCheck wrote:

dwinth wrote:

This Hallmark thread will eventually become as large as the old one from 2010 that was finally shut down. What the people who are upset with U-Verse do not realize is that no matter how many posts or threats they make to leave U-Verse , nothing will change as a result.

 

AT&T is completely aware that there are subscribers who would like to have the Hallmark channels back. It isn't as if AT&T is surprised at this point by all of the posts after three years and three months.

 


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.


I've said it before and I'm sure I'll say it again: I was a retention Rep for Uverse in 2010. I cancelled more accounts during the Scripps-conflict weekend that November than during the 2 years between Hallmark's disappearance and my departure. 

 

Heck, I would almost think I cancelled more accounts because of the FS Midwest Cardinal's game disputes (which affected only a handful of Uverse markets) than because of Hallmark.


I am very surprised by your findings, but I will not dispute what you said since you were a retention representative for U-Verse for two years. What you found indicates how unimportant the Hallmark channels are to most U-Verse subscribers. It is the very small vocal minority that makes it sound otherwise.

 

I would imagine that some of those subscribers who left during the Scripps-AT&T conflict came back to U-Verse when the new carriage agreement was signed.

 


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.


In fairness, remember, I was just one rep, so my experience may have been unusual. Also, the Scripps networks affected a variety of channels, so it makes sense more people complained.


dwinth wrote:

MicCheck wrote:

dwinth wrote:

This Hallmark thread will eventually become as large as the old one from 2010 that was finally shut down. What the people who are upset with U-Verse do not realize is that no matter how many posts or threats they make to leave U-Verse , nothing will change as a result.

 

AT&T is completely aware that there are subscribers who would like to have the Hallmark channels back. It isn't as if AT&T is surprised at this point by all of the posts after three years and three months.

 


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.


I've said it before and I'm sure I'll say it again: I was a retention Rep for Uverse in 2010. I cancelled more accounts during the Scripps-conflict weekend that November than during the 2 years between Hallmark's disappearance and my departure. 

 

Heck, I would almost think I cancelled more accounts because of the FS Midwest Cardinal's game disputes (which affected only a handful of Uverse markets) than because of Hallmark.


I am very surprised by your findings, but I will not dispute what you said since you were a retention representative for U-Verse for two years. What you found indicates how unimportant the Hallmark channels are to most U-Verse subscribers. It is the very small vocal minority that makes it sound otherwise.

 

I would imagine that some of those subscribers who left during the Scripps-AT&T conflict came back to U-Verse when the new carriage agreement was signed.

 


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.


In fairness, remember, I was just one rep, so my experience may have been unusual. Also, the Scripps networks affected a variety of channels, so it makes sense more people complained.

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

236 of 787 (14,629 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 9, 2013 10:38:53 AM
0
(0)
ACE - Professor

oufanindallas wrote:

dwinth wrote:

This Hallmark thread will eventually become as large as the old one from 2010 that was finally shut down. What the people who are upset with U-Verse do not realize is that no matter how many posts or threats they make to leave U-Verse , nothing will change as a result.

 

AT&T is completely aware that there are subscribers who would like to have the Hallmark channels back. It isn't as if AT&T is surprised at this point by all of the posts after three years and three months.

 


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.


There really aren't that many different posters in these threads, it's usually 1 new post and 5 or six of us regulars responding.

 


 

And I'm sure many of those new posters could easily be the same person with a new free email address posting from the offices of Comcast, et al.


oufanindallas wrote:

dwinth wrote:

This Hallmark thread will eventually become as large as the old one from 2010 that was finally shut down. What the people who are upset with U-Verse do not realize is that no matter how many posts or threats they make to leave U-Verse , nothing will change as a result.

 

AT&T is completely aware that there are subscribers who would like to have the Hallmark channels back. It isn't as if AT&T is surprised at this point by all of the posts after three years and three months.

 


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.


There really aren't that many different posters in these threads, it's usually 1 new post and 5 or six of us regulars responding.

 


 

And I'm sure many of those new posters could easily be the same person with a new free email address posting from the offices of Comcast, et al.

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

237 of 787 (14,599 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 9, 2013 10:40:21 AM
0
(0)
ACE - Professor

marcindublin wrote:

Hiding the shopping channels is like playing Whack-a-Mole. As soon as you hide one, two more pop up. They really are getting out of hand... It used to be that they were consolidated. Now, they are spread out everywhere except, of course, in the premiums.

 

 


 

Huh? misplaced post? At least now you can directly input the channel number, even if it isn't obvious.


marcindublin wrote:

Hiding the shopping channels is like playing Whack-a-Mole. As soon as you hide one, two more pop up. They really are getting out of hand... It used to be that they were consolidated. Now, they are spread out everywhere except, of course, in the premiums.

 

 


 

Huh? misplaced post? At least now you can directly input the channel number, even if it isn't obvious.

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: hallmark

238 of 787 (14,598 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Dec 30, 2013 7:11:35 AM
0
(0)
Tutor
Edited by Taylarie on Dec 30, 2013 at 7:22:13 AM

I am getting pressure from my wife to drop ATT and go to Charter to get the Hallmark Channel and Hallmark Movie Channel.  I understand the issue with programming costs.  How about adding the Hallmark Channel as a premium channel (like HBO, etc)?  We would pay a monthly fee just to have those channels available - and be able to keep our other great ATT lineup. Otherwise, to keep peace at home, I may have to drop Uverse and go back to cable just to avoid spousal abuse!

 

Thanks for thinking about this option, ATT.   Negotiate a premium fee with Hallmark.  It could be a win-win for both ATT and Hallmark - as well as your customers who really appreciate the Hallmark programming. 

I am getting pressure from my wife to drop ATT and go to Charter to get the Hallmark Channel and Hallmark Movie Channel.  I understand the issue with programming costs.  How about adding the Hallmark Channel as a premium channel (like HBO, etc)?  We would pay a monthly fee just to have those channels available - and be able to keep our other great ATT lineup. Otherwise, to keep peace at home, I may have to drop Uverse and go back to cable just to avoid spousal abuse!

 

Thanks for thinking about this option, ATT.   Negotiate a premium fee with Hallmark.  It could be a win-win for both ATT and Hallmark - as well as your customers who really appreciate the Hallmark programming. 

Re: Hallmark

[ Edited ]
239 of 787 (13,753 Views)
Advanced
You must be signed in to add attachments
Share this post
Share this post