View Full Version : Declining subscriber growth - 5yr projection
http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/071002/0309989.html
Thoughts?
Personally, I think they are overvaluing the "triple bundle", the market impact of Fios (rural areas will never see Fios - which happens to be Directv's strong market),and AT&T's Uverse. But again, that is my opinion.
purtman
10-03-07, 11:06 AM
I don't think they take into account that the cable networks, until they find a solution for their bandwidth, will be able to keep up with the HD. As HD grows, so will the number of people who demand it.
noneroy
10-03-07, 11:15 AM
Wow, that looked a lot like actual news. But it's a press release selling a report for $500. So it might be a study....but there are still studys that say smoking doesn't cause cancer and there is no global warming (hey, it's october and 90 degrees, but whatever). You can have a study prove whatever point you want, I guess.
Until cable gets more bandwidth they will be screwed. They need to ditch the analog channels or something. Oh and no Sunday Ticket either....
Ext 721
10-03-07, 11:16 AM
I don't think they take into account that the cable networks, until they find a solution for their bandwidth, will be able to keep up with the HD. As HD grows, so will the number of people who demand it.
to keep up with bandwidth, cable's going to have to alienate their base...people who use a 6-way splitter to pipe the analog signal to their 5 analog TV sets.
they'll have to either send unencrypted digital (fat chance before 2009) to digital TVs, or else make every sub who wants more than 50 channels rent boxes...which will drive costs higher than directv.
so to keep up with HD, cable will need to lose their base of low-rent customers...
and of those, since E* is lower rent, about 30% will go to D*
if that doesn't happen, the high-rent customers will go FIOS or D*.
The only other way out is tricky for cable, and will involve huge infrastructure expenses, and completely new STB technology...which is why I have stock in bigband, which is COX's choice for switched digital video.:D
Stuart Sweet
10-03-07, 11:42 AM
I don't know, I think it's all smoke and mirrors.
Teacherman
10-03-07, 11:50 AM
Cable doesn't even offer HD in our neck of the woods, I doubt FIOS will ever see the light of day, the good citizens of this neck of the woods would probably see transmission of pictures and sound with light as the devils work and ban it.:D
phat78boy
10-03-07, 11:50 AM
If D* markets their large increase of HD channels correctly, they will not have a decline for a few years. Absolutely every big box retailer is pushing HD as soon as you enter the door, D* will be the largest nationwide provider of HD. I think they will need to be creative, but would really have to shoot themselves in the foot to not make out as they are in the perfect position right now. Having a lead on an industry gives you a lot of power. Ask microsoft... lol.
chicagojim
10-03-07, 11:51 AM
AT&T has been installing fiber down my block for three months. The tech was working at my slick yesterday. "Get ready for U-verse!" he said . .
"Get off my land!", I responded as I pointed to my dish . . . . :lol:
Everywhere I've been, cable service is among the worst of any service provider of any industry. They break things that are working right and have an uncanny ability to do just the opposite of what you ask of them.....no matter how many times you repeat yourself. I want no part of them if at all possible.
JeffTex42
10-03-07, 12:01 PM
AT&T has been installing fiber down my block for three months. The tech was working at my slick yesterday. "Get ready for U-verse!" he said . .
"Get off my land!", I responded as I pointed to my dish . . . . :lol:
I just moved to a new neighborhood that has Uverse (FTTP) in it. I've been a D* subscriber since the mid 90's (except for 1 year) and had no intention of switching away. When I found out about the 1 HD stream at a time limitation, there really was no question. (I do subscribe to Uverse internet ... 6 Mbps down x 1 Mbps up.) They must solve their bandwidth problem going forward if they plan to be competitive.
I just moved to a new neighborhood that has Uverse (FTTP) in it. I've been a D* subscriber since the mid 90's (except for 1 year) and had no intention of switching away. When I found out about the 1 HD stream at a time limitation, there really was no question. (I do subscribe to Uverse internet ... 6 Mbps down x 1 Mbps up.) They must solve their bandwidth problem going forward if they plan to be competitive.
I thought FTTP [Fiber to the Premises] didn't have that limitation. Here, we're getting FTTN [Fiber to the Node], which is a joke. AT&T set up a little booth in our neighborhood, so I stopped by to talk to their rep. I laughed when he told me about the FTTN bandwidth limitations. He wanted to know why I'd want two simultaneous HD streams. I asked him if he'd ever heard of a DVR. He just shrugged and stopped trying to sell me.
JeffTex42
10-03-07, 12:39 PM
I thought FTTP [Fiber to the Premises] didn't have that limitation. Here, we're getting FTTN [Fiber to the Node], which is a joke. AT&T set up a little booth in our neighborhood, so I stopped by to talk to their rep. I laughed when he told me about the FTTN bandwidth limitations. He wanted to know why I'd want two simultaneous HD streams. I asked him if he'd ever heard of a DVR. He just shrugged and stopped trying to sell me.
I think you're right about the bandwidth advantage of FTTP, but I haven't heard anything that would suggest that AT&T is going to offer different service levels between it's FTTP and FTTN customers.
Since I don't use their TV services (and don't plan to), I just wish they would open up the unused bandwidth for my internet access! :cool:
Upstream
10-03-07, 12:49 PM
Sounds like this projection is based on an August study in Massachusetts which showed that Fios took subscribers from DTV faster than from cable (http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=94185).
But one of the reasons for that is that Verizon was reselling DirecTV in the study area, so it was easier for them to convert their own customers from one service to another.
It is a real stretch to extrapolate that into a nationwide, five-year projection.
joe diamond
10-03-07, 01:43 PM
to keep up with bandwidth, cable's going to have to alienate their base...people who use a 6-way splitter to pipe the analog signal to their 5 analog TV sets.
they'll have to either send unencrypted digital (fat chance before 2009) to digital TVs, or else make every sub who wants more than 50 channels rent boxes...which will drive costs higher than directv.
so to keep up with HD, cable will need to lose their base of low-rent customers...
and of those, since E* is lower rent, about 30% will go to D*
if that doesn't happen, the high-rent customers will go FIOS or D*.
The only other way out is tricky for cable, and will involve huge infrastructure expenses, and completely new STB technology...which is why I have stock in bigband, which is COX's choice for switched digital video.:D
Exit,
I thought I was the only one.
When I sold and installed Primestar I never expected to get calls from cable customers. The LOS issue & costs seemed to just put satellite out of the reach of anyone who could get cable.
Cable customers followed me to my next stop to see if I could rig them with a Primestar. The constant reason was "*!%$$# cable company, if you can get your satellite to work my house I'm yours!'
I thought the internet capability or the phone thing would save the cable companies. I was wrong.
What surprised me was that DTV became the cable company.
Joe
The only way cable has a prayer of keeping up with satellite is to go to "switched video", which I think is something that Comcast is testing on the left coast.
It does not matter to me, I am with D* for the long-haul.
BTW, in the Detroit burbs, I have not heard about anyone offering fiber??
ActiveHDdave
10-03-07, 05:41 PM
It may not be such a bad thing in the new customer bandwagon lets up a little. That would be a good reason not increase or over inflate their price and nickle and dime everything.
spartanstew
10-03-07, 09:00 PM
We've had FIOS available here for over 1 year (we were one of the first markets). I just signed a new 2 year commitment with D* (and I don't even have an HDTV yet) by getting an HR20.
Competition makes things better for everyone, but I can't see D* declining like that. There's too much on the horizon.
Tom Robertson
10-03-07, 09:13 PM
Competition is great, but I have to agree with Chase Carey, people are figuring out that Triple Play isn't all that and a bag of chips.
Cheers,
Tom
spartanstew
10-03-07, 09:44 PM
That's true Tom. I already have FIOS internet and phone. My bill with D* is cheaper than if I would have added FIOS TV.
wingrider01
10-04-07, 06:37 AM
http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/071002/0309989.html
Thoughts?
Personally, I think they are overvaluing the "triple bundle", the market impact of Fios (rural areas will never see Fios - which happens to be Directv's strong market),and AT&T's Uverse. But again, that is my opinion.
Fios will probably never be seen outside of areas that do not have a strong verizon influence, at&t uverse - probalbt the same theng plus. I live in an area that is strong AT&T, asked a business office rep about it in my area was told probalbly not till 4th quarter 2008, 1st quarter 2009, the infrastruction in the neighborhodd is just not there - most of it was put in place back in the early 60's. Would love to see Uverse in my area just for the simple reason of internet connection, DSL is out of the question due to the distance of the switch to the house.
donshan
10-04-07, 06:50 AM
I have a fundamental reason to keep my conventional land line telephone service- reliability during emergencies. Many a time we have had storms and the power is out, the cable TV is out, my D* TV is out, and my computer is down. My electronic world has collapsed!. However I pick up my old direct connected old phone and there is a dial tone.
This is no accident. The phone companies have battery backup systems to provide the very small power needed for old style phone service.
I think cable TV needs to put their efforts into becoming a modern cable TV system with expanded HDTV, HD DVRs, VOD, and other TV services. Leave the phone service to the phone companies.
BTW, my next door neighbor swtiched to cable phone service, and was over to use our phone three times the first week because their phones were out!:eek2:
Competition is great, but I have to agree with Chase Carey, people are figuring out that Triple Play isn't all that and a bag of chips.
Cheers,
Tom
Agreed Tom on both points. I'm a subscriber to Comcast HSI, and as an observer of their marketing/new product deployment as well as their technical support through their forum - Comcast is deploying new technologies to areas that Fios has entered first. In addition, it is almost hilarious to see the Comcast employed moderator's reaction to any posted problems on their forum within these "highly competitive" areas.
Example:
Problem in Baltimore - resolution/response within the day.
Problem in my area - you may not get a response (from a similarly reported problem.)
This is a repeated pattern on their "help" forums.
Ed Campbell
10-04-07, 06:57 AM
I have a fundamental reason to keep my conventional land line telephone service- reliability during emergencies. Many a time we have had storms and the power is out, the cable TV is out, my D* TV is out, and my computer is down.
You don't own a cellphone?
I shut off my land line when I downloaded Skype. Here in NM our "superlative" electric utility is about as sharp as the average cable company. Which means a power outage every few weeks.
I use T-Mobile to call the powerco and complain.
donshan
10-04-07, 07:07 AM
You don't own a cellphone?
I shut off my land line when I downloaded Skype. Here in NM our "superlative" electric utility is about as sharp as the average cable company. Which means a power outage every few weeks.
I use T-Mobile to call the powerco and complain.
Yes, we have two cell phones too, but during every emergency I have read about cellphone systems are jammed beyond capacity because everyone wants to use them at once, assuming , the cell towers still have power. Conventional land line phones do not depend on grid power to operate in an emergency. The phone companies have big battery backup systems.
Edit: Just to clarify- I think at least one phone in the house must not use grid power either- We have two phones that use no AC power/
MIKE0616
10-04-07, 07:07 AM
http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/071002/0309989.html
Thoughts?
Personally, I think they are overvaluing the "triple bundle", the market impact of Fios (rural areas will never see Fios - which happens to be Directv's strong market),and AT&T's Uverse. But again, that is my opinion.
That is an AD for crissakes! It contains no new info and is trying to sell you a $500 report. They are paying Yahoo to be posted on there. :lol:
It looks like something you would expect to see on late night TV! hehehe
Interesting read. First, I wouldn't discount it out of hand because it's a survey. Surveys are bought by companies when looking at how the market is shaping up, and where things are going. No different than doing focus groups to determine the likely success of a product. They aren't designed to push a specific viewpoint, necessarily. They're commissioned to give companies information - really no different than commissioning a poll. Polls can be skewed, too, but if the purpose is to give a specific customer information, they can provide very valuable information.
Second, I have to agree with some of the comments here. The decline they're predicting sounds a little steep to me, but I believe it is true that many dish subscribers come from telephone companies.
Next, as for the triple play saving, I wouldn't discount that. They can be substantial. For some time I had fios internet and phone, and DirecTV SD only service with 2 DVRs. And no extras. My bill was about $155/month. I have since switched to FiOS TV service, with HD, and with more channels, and my bill was knocked down to $132/month for the first year, and $138/month after that. I have since added their movie pack (showtime, TMC, Starz, IFC, Sundance, Encore, Flix) bringing my bill to $145/month for the first year. Some customers see even greater savings, depending on their setup.
kmill14
10-04-07, 08:48 AM
Well, if in 18 months DTV does not have a reliable HD DVR box that records what I ask it to, I'll be one of those switching.
By that time, I figure Cable will be up to speed with its switched video, and a nice new Tivo HD box will hopefully be compatible with said SDV.
Of course DTV could improve the quality of its box by then, but we shall see.
purtman
10-04-07, 09:01 AM
What box do you have that is not reliable? Most of us find the HR20 to be reliable.
The_Geyser
10-04-07, 09:15 AM
I'll be here in 5 years. Charter Cable stinks and the local phone company has no FIOS plans.
kmill14
10-04-07, 09:29 AM
What box do you have that is not reliable? Most of us find the HR20 to be reliable.
Based on the number of people complaining about missed recordings in the HR-20 forum, I don't know if "most" is the right word here.
The other issue that comes into play is exclusive programming. The last time I almost switched I stayed with D* because of NFL package. If I could have gotten that with cable I might have switched (actually I have both at the moment). If someone could lock up a MLB contract then people also might go there.
I think another big issue is local stations. I do get my locals from D* but ABC isn't HD from D* and neither is PBS. Until D* can carry all the locals they also have an issue with people. Putting up and using an OTA is just too old.
For those who complain about the hr20 - I hear similar problems from friends who have cable DVR's with programs getting missed etc. I'm sure some weeks D* is the worst and at other time cable might be.
People are still worried about weather outages (real issue), "ugly" dishes (??), and other issues that D* and E* really haven't done a great job of convincing people otherwise.
JeffTex42
10-04-07, 10:08 AM
The other issue that comes into play is exclusive programming. The last time I almost switched I stayed with D* because of NFL package. If I could have gotten that with cable I might have switched (actually I have both at the moment). If someone could lock up a MLB contract then people also might go there.
I think another big issue is local stations. I do get my locals from D* but ABC isn't HD from D* and neither is PBS. Until D* can carry all the locals they also have an issue with people. Putting up and using an OTA is just too old.
For those who complain about the hr20 - I hear similar problems from friends who have cable DVR's with programs getting missed etc. I'm sure some weeks D* is the worst and at other time cable might be.
People are still worried about weather outages (real issue), "ugly" dishes (??), and other issues that D* and E* really haven't done a great job of convincing people otherwise.
What do you mean by OTA is too old? As far as weather outages are concerned, my OTA keeps the family happy (somewhat) when the storm clouds come.
Well, if in 18 months DTV does not have a reliable HD DVR box that records what I ask it to, I'll be one of those switching.
By that time, I figure Cable will be up to speed with its switched video, and a nice new Tivo HD box will hopefully be compatible with said SDV.
TiVo can't get anything done in 18 months, come on now!
wingrider01
10-04-07, 11:30 AM
Based on the number of people complaining about missed recordings in the HR-20 forum, I don't know if "most" is the right word here.
by the same point if you based opinion on the problems that occur with the previous box you can say the same thing about it
kmill14
10-04-07, 12:00 PM
by the same point if you based opinion on the problems that occur with the previous box you can say the same thing about it
As far as recording reliability goes, no I can't say that. Guide data issues being equal, are you telling me the current HR-20 box would record shows as reliably as previous Tivo boxes?
What do you mean by OTA is too old? As far as weather outages are concerned, my OTA keeps the family happy (somewhat) when the storm clouds come.
I meant telling someone who currently has cable to go put up and antenna so they can receive local stations will seem to that person as if they are going back in time. We all hailed cable as not needing antennas anymore. I think if you have one that's great just not, to me effective marketing for D* to tell people they have to install one.
I keep basic cable to keep people happy in bad weather so I understand completely.
JeffTex42
10-04-07, 01:34 PM
I meant telling someone who currently has cable to go put up and antenna so they can receive local stations will seem to that person as if they are going back in time. We all hailed cable as not needing antennas anymore. I think if you have one that's great just not, to me effective marketing for D* to tell people they have to install one.
I keep basic cable to keep people happy in bad weather so I understand completely.
Gotcha - I agree. We just moved in a new house, and I didn't mind mounting the antenna myself ... except for the fact that I totally misjudged how steep my roof is. I'm glad I don't do dish installations for a living.
mrrydogg
10-04-07, 04:17 PM
As far as recording reliability goes, no I can't say that. Guide data issues being equal, are you telling me the current HR-20 box would record shows as reliably as previous Tivo boxes?
Never have had one problem with my HR20....the new ones seem to be just fine and the software updates have been a huge upgrade. I haven't had mine long, maybe a year, but still. Have a TIVO too and I don't notice any difference for the most part. The HR20 even has a new "TIVO like" fast-forward that functions almost exactly the same. Almost.
:)
vBulletin® v3.7.6, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.