I know there are a lot of threads on Directv "negotiating" tactics. I have, for each and every year, been able to haggle with them over some issue or another and not pay the full price (I make this statement to suggest that YES you can work something in your favor).
My initial thought on Directv putting the renewal orders on the July statement is
A)that doesn't sound all that early from previous years when considering the "early bird" stuff they usually promote (but can't this year due to the lockout) and
B)sounds like maybe they are doing what the NFL did this year and pushed their date up a bit. That is interesting to me because if the NFL is asking season ticket holders to commit earlier than ever, I have to wonder is that a sign that they REALLY DO need some money or is it a sign that they think there will not be a full season and they are trying to get commitments and money in hand (cause we all know, its A LOT harder to get a refund from a company once you gave them money vs. holding off and paying whenever).
Maybe I'm missing something but it seems like in light of the lockout, if the NFL is going to make a statement to the public and say they are feeling the effects of the lockout, then maybe they would want to support that with "ticket sales are down" to help their court hearing instead of "Sales are on pace/better than last year".
Anyways, my thought on the original question is
IF I WERE A SUNDAY TICKET HOLDER (I'm not..I cancelled already in hopes to utilize the idea I am getting ready to share), I would call Directv and tell them no to auto-renew because I "have serious concerns" about the lockout. Of course, they will tell you about how much you are saving to do it early and one guy even said "you know they are going to have football". But that's not the point. I deal in "what is" and right now, there "is not". So, I'm willing to gamble and get my point across. And of course, Directv will bombard you with offers to come back and "last chances to save", etc. For now, I ignore it. Worst case scenario, football comes back and I pay a few more dollars than I would have (but I'm playing with house money because I ahve never paid the listed rate...always had something thrown in for free or discounted).
But what I think will happen in Reality is that if enough people draw the line now and they hear from enough people that there will come a point when their Sunday Ticket subscription numbers aren't supporting the contract they have with the NFL and they will offer people discounts to buy it this year (especially the poeple that have had the service for years).
Keep in mind, it was only 2009 when they re-upped with the NFL and paid them an additonal $300M/Year through 2014 to retain the rights exclusively. So, Directv is on the hook big time on this and its important to keep in mind that there is a reason they agreed to such an increase and did so even knowing that the CBA expired soon. They did it, not because they make money hand over fist with Sunday Ticket, but because ST is what brings new subscriptions to the door. But if there is a perceived uncertainty about an NFL season, there will be less new subscribers rushing to add service (why switch if the one thing they switch for may not exist?). So, when you add those potential new customer losses one one side and combine it with existing customers balking on the idea of reupping, THEN you have REAL losses (no new money and now we can't reasonably pay for the $1Billion/year package because subscriptions are not being renewed).
Here's a good summary of that latest deal
http://www.dish-television.com/2009/03/24/directv-nfl-extend-sunday-ticket/
Maybe haggling with them isn't your thing. Maybe the suggestion of holding off and playing RUSSIAN Roullette doesn't sound too smart. But I can tell you I have never payed the rediculous $75/year for the SUPERFAN component of Sunday Ticket (the money some people pay to have their
HD PROVIDER ACTUALLY PROVIDE SUNDAY TICKET TO THEM IN...GASP...HIGH DEFINITION) and I'm reasonably convinced that people like me that called them on that were a small part of what led to the change in that policy (my understanding is that they scrapped that "offeR" and now do things differently...I could be wrong on that because, like I said, I have never paid for it).