Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Directv: What am I missing in this biz practice

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Directv: What am I missing in this biz practice

    I hardly ever buy a PPV because I think 4.99 is too much all things considered (I think I've purchased 1 PPV in the past 12 months. I have Netflix. A Redbox is about 3mi from here.

    But tonight I was about to purchase a PPV when I saw 5.99 was now the price.

    IMHO the price should be going down, not up. Yeah, it's just a dollar more than I was already expecting to pay... but it was the straw that broke the camel's back. I paid 7.00 the other night to watch Gran Torino at the cinema.... 5.99 is over the top for a PPV.

    I can't imagine how much business they could be doing at these prices considering the competition. Movies hit DVD before they hit PPV so they can't even claim you can see them there first. You can generally work your Netflix titles to have a new DVD title in your mailbox the same day it hits store shelves if your time your returns properly.

    I have no idea what cable is charging for PPV these days and it might be the same ballpark but IMHO if these entities are serious about these services they need to rethink their pricing.

    And while I'm complaining.... I was also going to add another premium service to my account (and probably drop HBO in the near future). Well, Directv wouldn't let me add a new premium to my current package because it's 'outdated'. It was worded in a way to make it sound like it wasn't technically possible and I'd have to update to a new package before it could be added. What BS. Of course it's possible.... The gist of it is, I have some grandfathered HD channels that I would LOSE if I upgraded my package and would have to pay more than I am currently paying to get a new pkg and then need to add these back (since they aren't included in any normal pkgs and are an add-on even if you pay the 10.00 HD access fee).

    So, Directv didn't get 5.99 from me tonight nor did they get 11.00 for the new premium add on.... and they didn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling about their business practices either...
    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  • #2
    Re: Directv: What am I missing in this biz practice

    I've never had a problem with them...I feel for you. PPV is worthless and expensive, and I too have Netflix and frequent Redbox.

    Every three months I call and ask for a Showtime 3 month trial. They give it to me with me telling them of intentions to purchase a premium package in the future, "I just want to see if it's worth it." Is what I tell them. I've had Showtime for free for the past 9 months. The downside to this is that Showtime is the only available package they can provide me for a free "trial".

    Since Flight of the Conchords is back, I was thinking of actually purchasing it. But, their programming (Movies) I've noticed really stinks IMO. I'm thinking of just downloading the episodes every Sunday evening.

    Other than that, try calling them back and telling them that, "The last person you spoke with told you it was possible to add on a package without upgrading your plan."

    It works with us and getting XM at $9.99/mo every year, since it's actually $12.99/mo now.


    FYI: We have 2 HD receivers, 1 SD receiver. 250+ channels, pay only $60 if that helps you.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Directv: What am I missing in this biz practice

      Originally posted by Bball View Post
      I hardly ever buy a PPV because I think 4.99 is too much all things considered (I think I've purchased 1 PPV in the past 12 months. I have Netflix. A Redbox is about 3mi from here.

      But tonight I was about to purchase a PPV when I saw 5.99 was now the price.

      IMHO the price should be going down, not up. Yeah, it's just a dollar more than I was already expecting to pay... but it was the straw that broke the camel's back. I paid 7.00 the other night to watch Gran Torino at the cinema.... 5.99 is over the top for a PPV.

      I can't imagine how much business they could be doing at these prices considering the competition. Movies hit DVD before they hit PPV so they can't even claim you can see them there first. You can generally work your Netflix titles to have a new DVD title in your mailbox the same day it hits store shelves if your time your returns properly.

      I have no idea what cable is charging for PPV these days and it might be the same ballpark but IMHO if these entities are serious about these services they need to rethink their pricing.

      And while I'm complaining.... I was also going to add another premium service to my account (and probably drop HBO in the near future). Well, Directv wouldn't let me add a new premium to my current package because it's 'outdated'. It was worded in a way to make it sound like it wasn't technically possible and I'd have to update to a new package before it could be added. What BS. Of course it's possible.... The gist of it is, I have some grandfathered HD channels that I would LOSE if I upgraded my package and would have to pay more than I am currently paying to get a new pkg and then need to add these back (since they aren't included in any normal pkgs and are an add-on even if you pay the 10.00 HD access fee).

      So, Directv didn't get 5.99 from me tonight nor did they get 11.00 for the new premium add on.... and they didn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling about their business practices either...

      Gotta play CSR roullette. If you get to someone who knows what they are doing, you can keep your grandfathered package and add on a premium. I've done it a couple times. You just have to get to someone who knows what they are doing . . . you may have to ask the 1st CSR to escalate it to the next level. They are usually far more competent.

      Unless they've changed things in the last year or so to where you have to upgrade? I hope that's not the case.

      Also, I've never ordered PPV from them other than I think a UFC event.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Directv: What am I missing in this biz practice

        Comcast is still charging $4.99, but they do have a small amount of movies that are $6.99. The difference is that these more expensive few are independant films that are still showing in theatres. They also have another pricing tier that is $2.99 and these seem to be older movies.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Directv: What am I missing in this biz practice

          Methinks the convenience factor of PPV isn't going to be worth 5.99 to many people. Not only that but I doubt 4.99 did much to sell movies.

          I wonder what they 'have' to charge to make the service profitable? Who is gouging who here? Do the studios gouge Directv first, and Directv then does what they have to, or pile on even more than they have to?

          Somebody needs to rethink their business model. As I said, I'd think PPV rates need to be going down, not up. It may be they can sell 100 movies at 6.00 or 200 movies at 3.00... but I think the goal should be getting people to use the service at a reasonable profit.

          I know I'd use it more at a more reasonable 2.99 rate. But no, I can't see spending 6 bucks when I can drive 5 mins and watch a new movie at the local cinema at 7.00.... let alone rent a DVD for a buck or so.
          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

          ------

          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

          -John Wooden

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Directv: What am I missing in this biz practice

            I wonder if Directv is banking on a large portion of their customers being in rural areas where a trip to the cinema or the nearest Redbox is more of a hike? So they are looking to gouge those customers instead of trying to be competitive with these other services.

            That only makes sense if they don't take Netflix seriously as a competitor.
            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

            ------

            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

            -John Wooden

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Directv: What am I missing in this biz practice

              Well, I think that bandwidth costs money, so they aren't too worried about how many people use the PPV feature. After all, they are in business to make money, not make cheap movies available to more people. My guess is they are fine with the number of people who choose PPV, and since that number is actually dropping, given the availability of Netflix, Redbox, downloading pirated movies for free, and actually going to the theater, the price had to go UP to justify offering the service at all. If more poeple used it, there would be higher costs to Directv to have hardware infrastructure in place to handle it, so why would they want to encourage that? Add in that they are at the mercy of the studios setting prices for making the movies available to PPV in the first place, and it is a very small part of their business plan.

              Sorry to hear about the outdated package, and I feel your pain. I had to upgrade my package not long ago to add the sports pack, and I didn't really fight doing it. I got to actually save $2.00 a month because the channels I actually watch were in the lower tier package, so it didn't bother me too much.

              Thanks Dukie, I will try that with Showtime. I usually call every few months and try to squeeze some free programming out of them. It is DEFINITELY roulette with the customer service reps. Some of them are incredibly inept. Others are fantastic and actually seem to ENJOY their job. Crazy, I know.



              RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Directv: What am I missing in this biz practice

                Originally posted by heywoode View Post
                Well, I think that bandwidth costs money, so they aren't too worried about how many people use the PPV feature. After all, they are in business to make money, not make cheap movies available to more people. My guess is they are fine with the number of people who choose PPV, and since that number is actually dropping, given the availability of Netflix, Redbox, downloading pirated movies for free, and actually going to the theater, the price had to go UP to justify offering the service at all. If more poeple used it, there would be higher costs to Directv to have hardware infrastructure in place to handle it, so why would they want to encourage that?
                The bandwidth is already used though. It doesn't matter if 1 person is watching a PPV or a billion. The movie is already flowing thru the system to the bird. And they play on a schedule, not waiting for a 'buy' or a certain number of viewers before they start.

                So there is no higher cost to Directv for people using the service. More people = more money for Directv. Not higher costs. We're not talking about "On Demand" here (plus the "On Demand" service uses the internet, not the satellites).

                They could've cut back on the number of viewings and amount of shows playing at any one time if they were worried about bandwidth. Raising the already uncompetitive price even higher was the wrong tactic if they are needing more income to justify the service.


                Add in that they are at the mercy of the studios setting prices for making the movies available to PPV in the first place, and it is a very small part of their business plan.
                This is an area I wonder about. I have no idea what the studios charge. It seems odd to me that renting DVD's could be so much more cheaper than PPV. For one things, DVD's are a physical piece of media complete with packaging and needing to be handled on the business side of things by a human to various degrees. Whether it's to reload the Redbox or man the counter at the video store...etc. But PPV is none of that.

                DVD's already have the scoop on being first to market ahead of PPV so there is no argument that PPV let's you see the film first. And even if there was, what about once the DVD was released, shouldn't the price go down?

                If the studio is dictating the price in any way, I'd think Directv should be balking and using their power to renegotiate. Pricing PPV out of the market is a short-sighted mistake.

                -Bball
                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                ------

                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Directv: What am I missing in this biz practice

                  With Comcast you get alot of free PPV stuff movies, t.v. shows, documentaries, etc. that are pretty decent. So if I'm feeling lazy i don't mind paying a high price once in a while for a new release (about 1 per month). I watch alot of their free stuff so I think it all works out in the end. And I don't know if it's just me, but it seems like most PPV HD looks a little better than some of the stuff I've played on Blu-Ray.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Directv: What am I missing in this biz practice

                    Originally posted by Erik View Post
                    With Comcast you get alot of free PPV stuff movies, t.v. shows, documentaries, etc. that are pretty decent. So if I'm feeling lazy i don't mind paying a high price once in a while for a new release (about 1 per month). I watch alot of their free stuff so I think it all works out in the end. And I don't know if it's just me, but it seems like most PPV HD looks a little better than some of the stuff I've played on Blu-Ray.
                    Hmmm..........

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Directv: What am I missing in this biz practice

                      The PPV movie isn't piped to you until you purchase it, so the bandwidth on the satellite is not being used until you pay for it to come to your house.



                      RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Directv: What am I missing in this biz practice

                        Originally posted by heywoode View Post
                        The PPV movie isn't piped to you until you purchase it, so the bandwidth on the satellite is not being used until you pay for it to come to your house.
                        Not sure what you're talking about here. The Directv PPV shows are broadcast at regular intervals on the schedule. They are flowing thru the birds and to everyone's home (with a dish). If you pay for it, the receiver opens it up so you can view it instead of a blank screen.

                        You seem to be talking about "On Demand" style PPV. Directv does have that but it's sent over the internet so it isn't a bandwidth factor for the satellites. The rest of the PPV is not piped directly to anyone, it's there for the viewing (if you pay the $$$ to open it up). The bandwidth is being used whether I (or anyone else) buys the movie or not.

                        Not only that, but if what you say was true, I could view a selected PPV any time I want. I have to select my PPV before it starts (or in the first few minutes) or I have to wait until the next showing.

                        It's no different than Showtime or HBO... They are active and using bandwidth all the time whether I subscribe or not. The only difference is, if I subscribe they open up 24/7 for me instead of just one day/showing only (like a PPV).

                        And lastly, Directv even goes ahead and sends some PPV's to your DVR where, if you pay, you can view them off the internal HD. Once viewed, it deletes itself. In that way you can watch something on your own schedule, but it didn't just pipe the show to me, it went to everyone with a DVR (new box).
                        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                        ------

                        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

                        -John Wooden

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Directv: What am I missing in this biz practice

                          U-verse's On Demand is generally 4 dollars for a 24 hour rental, some older movies are 2 dollars instead, some indie movies are 6 dollars.
                          Play Mafia!
                          Twitter

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Directv: What am I missing in this biz practice

                            Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
                            Hmmm..........
                            One example I'll give is Pirates of the Carribean. We have it on Blu-Ray, and it looks good. My daughter was watching it on Starz one day (not PPV, but the same quality from the same box) and to me, it looked a little better. I'm not saying that's they way it is for all movies, some stuff I've watched on Blu-Ray looks unbeatable. I'll also mention that the cable version was full-screen as opposed to the letterboxed Blu-Ray version, maybe that helps with the whole "darkness" of that movie, I don't know.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Directv: What am I missing in this biz practice

                              Directv is doing rather well

                              http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/02/10...bs-in-q4/12502

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X