EchoStar Asks Govt to Stop Murdoch's DirecTV Bid

[John Corn]

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - U.S. satellite television operator EchoStar sought on Tuesday to block media baron Rupert Murdoch from acquiring control of its bigger rival, DirecTV, telling regulators that the acquisition would undermine competition and drive rates higher.

Murdoch's Australia-based News Corp. could charge EchoStar and cable companies much more for carrying its Fox television and sports programs, once it had its own national distribution arm in DirecTV, EchoStar Communications Corp. said in a brief filed with the Federal Communications Commission (news - web sites).

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030618/media_nm/media_directv_echostar_dc_1

[Dgenx321]

Sounds like cheapo Charlie is getting worried.

[Chris Freeland]

Originally posted by Dgenx321
Sounds like cheapo Charlie is getting worried.

No, just tic for tat. :D

[BobMurdoch]

Payback's a bitch, ain't it?

I've been saying this since day one. If you hated E* taking over D*, you should be positively repulsed at what Rupert will do with it. Look for D*'s rates to start increasing like Cable's does once Rupert the Programmer can charge Rupert the Distributor whatever he wants, while doing a Steinbrenner and raising the rates so high that Charlie will refuse to pay, therefore giving him another exclusive competitive advantage.

[platinum]

Originally posted by BobMurdoch
Payback's a bitch, ain't it?

I've been saying this since day one. If you hated E* taking over D*, you should be positively repulsed at what Rupert will do with it. Look for D*'s rates to start increasing like Cable's does once Rupert the Programmer can charge Rupert the Distributor whatever he wants, while doing a Steinbrenner and raising the rates so high that Charlie will refuse to pay, therefore giving him another exclusive competitive advantage.

I disagree I think Rupert will help D* become a better service. There's no way he's going to increase rates like cable, there's too much competition out there. Charlie's just scared of some real competition.

[PSB]

Proper Charlie! is in a petulant frenzy, he's petulant, and he's in a frenzy : ) GOOD BYE! DISHNETWORK! You have ripped off some of your last customers! I wonder what they will call the new company when Rupert buys off Dish next?

Direct Dish TV

Remember this is the exact way it played out in the UK a few years ago, he just ate up the competition! (BSB) and renamed it BSKYB

[Karl Foster]

Originally posted by BobMurdoch
Payback's a bitch, ain't it?

I've been saying this since day one. If you hated E* taking over D*, you should be positively repulsed at what Rupert will do with it. Look for D*'s rates to start increasing like Cable's does once Rupert the Programmer can charge Rupert the Distributor whatever he wants, while doing a Steinbrenner and raising the rates so high that Charlie will refuse to pay, therefore giving him another exclusive competitive advantage.

What exactly do you think NewsCorp will do with D* to justify me being "repulsed?" Why do you think D*'s rates will go up? If rates go too high, D* subs will leap to E*. Rupert is in it to make money, not to drive away customers. He didn't get rich by being stupid. I look to see an all out war between two ultra-competetive businessmen. I look forward to seeing what is going to happen.

What I don't understand is why some folks seem to think they have an inalienable right to television programming. If Charlie is too "thrifty" (I won't say cheap) to pay what distributors are asking, then he needs to suffer those consequences in lost customer base. Believe me, if Charlie had the opportunity to acquire distribution rights to programming, he'd screw Directv over just as fast as the ink could dry on the contract. It's a cutthroat business, and sometimes the ones most willing to take the risks reap the rewards. Sometimes they fall flat on their faces. Those not willing to take risks will come in second.

[platinum]

Here...Here...

[Jacob S]

I find it ironic how Dish is going against Rupert when he tried to get a merger with DirecTv himself. This contradicts what he tried to do. Its like he is saying its ok for him to merge with DirecTv but not Rupert. If Charlie wants to share spectrum with DirecTv and have some compromise in the future then this is not the way to go about it and DirecTv may not go along with sharing spectrum for locals, HDTV, and other channels. after what Charlie tried to do.

[Frapp]

Jacob S,

In addition to that, did not Echostar recently pay some $5 Million in fines to several state attorney generals around the country in relation to some inaccurate advertising and bogus business practices ?

Correct me if I am wrong ?

[freemand]

Originally posted by Jacob S
I find it ironic how Dish is going against Rupert when he tried to get a merger with DirecTv himself. This contradicts what he tried to do. Its like he is saying its ok for him to merge with DirecTv but not Rupert. If Charlie wants to share spectrum with DirecTv and have some compromise in the future then this is not the way to go about it and DirecTv may not go along with sharing spectrum for locals, HDTV, and other channels. after what Charlie tried to do.

Pretty much the same thing can be said in reverse. When Charlie wanted DirecTV, Rupert didn't want him to have it, but now Rupert wants it himself. Business is like politics (and just about everything else for that matter) if it favors me I am for it; if not, I am against it.

[Jacob S]

Yes, Dish Network did pay out money to several states to settle issues with customers that had filed complaints with the attorney general.

I suppose one could look at it that way, since Rupert went against Charlie, Charlie is now going against Rupert.

[platinum]

I think Charlie soiled his diaper when he realized the competition Rupert's going give him, and the cable operators are just as worried.

[BobMurdoch]

Originally posted by Jacob S
I find it ironic how Dish is going against Rupert when he tried to get a merger with DirecTv himself. This contradicts what he tried to do. Its like he is saying its ok for him to merge with DirecTv but not Rupert. If Charlie wants to share spectrum with DirecTv and have some compromise in the future then this is not the way to go about it and DirecTv may not go along with sharing spectrum for locals, HDTV, and other channels. after what Charlie tried to do.

No, I see it this way..... If the feds think that Charlie's takeover was anticompetitive and damaging to the industry, then they have to cast that same harsh reasoning against Rupert for different reasons. If they allow this new merger to go through they give one company control of both content AND distribution. Price gouging normally follows when this happens. Fox owns ALL of the programming and only gets a small trickle from D* as he will have partners there BUT he will have a controlling iterest which will allow him to give thumbs up to any distribution deal signed by his programming arm. I'm an E* subscriber so I only care in that I am worried that they will set prices so high that of course Charlie the spendthrift won't pay it.

Hey, we're all talking speculation here anyway, but the FCC and Justice used the same Chicken Little worse case scenarios to shoot down Echostar. I would just hope that they make sure Rupert undergoes an equal amount of scrutiny.

[Jacob S]

I agree in that they did not want one company to control both satellite services in the U.S. vs still having two companies controlled by two different people.

[raj2001]

Awwwww.... The poor widdle baby charlie couldn't get his merger. Now he wants to stop big ol' bad rupert from owning his competitor. I'm so touched.

Sarcasm off...

If Charlie's this afraid of Murdoch, why doesn't he just improve DISH?

[raj2001]

Originally posted by BobMurdoch


No, I see it this way..... If the feds think that Charlie's takeover was anticompetitive and damaging to the industry, then they have to cast that same harsh reasoning against Rupert for different reasons.

This won't fly. Vertical integration isn't frowned upon as much by the FCC, that's why we now have AOL/Time Warner. If Warner can own TV stations and Time Warner cable, then Murdoch can own Fox and DirecTV. I simply don't see the complication.

[markh]

This won't fly. Vertical integration isn't frowned upon as much by the FCC, that's why we now have AOL/Time Warner. If Warner can own TV stations and Time Warner cable, then Murdoch can own Fox and DirecTV. I simply don't see the complication.

The complication is that Time Warner Cable isn't available nationwide but D* gives Rupert access to potentially every household in the U.S.

Rupert worked behind the scenes in Washington to shoot down charlie. At least Ergen has the guts to publicly oppose this.

[Karl Foster]

The complication is that Time Warner Cable isn't available nationwide but D* gives Rupert access to potentially every household in the U.S.

Rupert worked behind the scenes in Washington to shoot down charlie. At least Ergen has the guts to publicly oppose this.

Ergen has never been shy about doing his dirty laundry in public. Look at the whole ABC Family/ESPN debacle, as well as the negotiation tactics with local stations, F/X, TBS, etc. Also lets not forget that Ergen makes this big announcement about HD, stock prices go through the roof, and then nothing happens, no dates to provide service. Same with the new receivers. All this makes stock prices go up (at least temporarily). Guess who owns over 50% of the stock? Guess who cashes out some stock every time his own announcements drive the price up? Talk about a self-serving CEO! Sure he is a good-'ole southern boy with a folksy accent, but don't be fooled. He's in it to make money as much as the next guy.

I prefer to deal with a company that keeps the dirty laundry in the hamper and just provides me with a quality product. I also prefer to deal with people who don't send widespread panic through their customer base every time a contract is about to expire.

[Mike123abc]

This won't fly. Vertical integration isn't frowned upon as much by the FCC, that's why we now have AOL/Time Warner. If Warner can own TV stations and Time Warner cable, then Murdoch can own Fox and DirecTV. I simply don't see the complication.


The complication is that TWC has very few areas of competition where it sells its stations to market competitors. Until DBS came along the number of places where there was a choice of multichannel providers was almost none.

Fox will be in the position of selling products to competitors in every market. They can charge more for their stations and sports nets, then just have DirecTV run at a loss. They make money because they are charging themselves and profiting on the sports nets to make up for the loss at DirecTV. The competitors just take the loss or have to charge more.

[Jacob S]

Isn't illegal for a CEO to give promises to inflate stock prices, cash in his stocks, then not follow through with those promises? Reminds me of this Martha Stewart case.

[Greg Bimson]

Fox will be in the position of selling products to competitors in every market. They can charge more for their stations and sports nets, then just have DirecTV run at a loss.So, let me see if I get this correct.

If I own GMH (Hughes) stock, and Murdoch starts to run Hughes at a loss, I'll be suing the CEO for acting against my best interest as a Hughes stockholder. And I am sure I wouldn't be the only stockholder to do so.

[Brett]

Fox will be in the position of selling products to competitors in every market. They can charge more for their stations and sports nets, then just have DirecTV run at a loss.

It wouldnt be successful.

Fox needs the eyeballs and viewership counts. DirecTV will never be the big fish, cable will be the the foreseeable future. Murdoch can only increase their rates by few pennies per sub. If they increased their rates (more than other companies were), cable and E* would just drop the Fox programming. Fox' end up losing money that way.

Time Warner doesnt have as much clout as one might think. They couldnt get other systems to carry CNNsi, and are not having much success with CNNfn. They have success with HBO, only because its alacarte premium (which cablers like) and viewers like HBO programming and are willing to pay for it.

Murdoch owns RSNs and may have clout this way. But, it'd be used for the good -- to help in effort to get Comcast SportsNet on satellite.

UNLESS....

The question is it legal for Murdoch to charge Echostar more than the other providers? Meaning pick against Echostar?

After NBC lost bid for KRON, NBC was jealous and became furiated at Young Broadcasting, who outbid them. NBC was allowed to threaten to charge KRON 4 in San Francisco for NBC affiliation at an absurd rate. NBC doesnt charge any of its affiliates in other markets for affiliation in this regard, so Young was being picked against.


Over at another top market, Boston (market #6) (a close market in rank to San Francisco - market #5), NBC compensates Ed Ansin's Sunbeam Television WHDH 7 to carry the NBC programming. Completely opposite network affiliation deal, so market size really was unrelated, since both markets are big. Young should have gotten a similar deal as Ed Ansin's Sunbeam Television station WHDH.

But, NBC doesnt want to lose WHDH 7 as an affiliate. They would never charge WHDH for affiliation. If they tried, Mr. Ed Ansin will sell to Fox and/ or just ask to pick up Fox affiliation. Fox would love move to VHF in Boston. NBC would be offset to UHF in that scenario). NBC has a big issue moving to UHF in a top market, while Fox moving to VHF. (They bought CH.10 in Philly, partially in fear Fox would acquire it in 1995, if they didnt get it). Chicago, Boston and Philly are the only top markets where Fox is still on UHF. NBC doesnt want that changed. NBC doesnt want to end up on UHF while Fox goes to VHF.

In San Francisco, Fox was already on VHF, so the issue never came to play.

The point I'm trying to say is FCC seems to have no issue for one company to be singled out and charged at (absurd) rate for programming rights, than other companies. The FCC has totally ignored the intent of program access laws in DirecTV vs. Comcast Spectator, instead siding by Comcast thru a loophole. The FCC in this regards is totally useless. Our government should cut funding to the FCC or eliminate the useless agency altogether.

[markh]

I don't doubt Ergen's goal is to maximize his profits even with his folksy manner:) But Karl, didn't D* take it's dispute with PAX public? That was after E* and D* had talks after the merger announcement so I'm sure that's Charlie's fault too. As far as the dirty laundry being made public, how about prosecuting people for looking at piracy websites?

[Jacob S]

Some look at the piracy sites just to see what they are up to having an interest in what can be done that do not want to pirate the systems. I do not think people should be prosecuted for viewing the piracy websites. However, those that do post on the websites certain content that would reveal that they do pirate or help other piraters should be prosecuted.

[Karl Foster]

I don't doubt Ergen's goal is to maximize his profits even with his folksy manner:) But Karl, didn't D* take it's dispute with PAX public? That was after E* and D* had talks after the merger announcement so I'm sure that's Charlie's fault too. As far as the dirty laundry being made public, how about prosecuting people for looking at piracy websites?

You are correct. Charlie is sooo perfect and so is E* :rolleyes: I don't know why I sounded so pissed off yesterday. I just get frustrated with E* subscribers telling everyone how great Charlie is and how he cares so much about his customers. I used to be an E* subscriber with a 301 and a 501 receiver when they first came out, so I can speak from some experience. I never felt that E* gave a hoot about me and the problems I had with my 501. All they wanted to do was sign me up for CC Autopay. After my 3rd attempt in a month to have a 501 that actually worked, I gave up on E* so my opinion is very jaded. My opinions about E* are all equipment related. I thought the way they treated me was horrible and they no longer deserve my $60 per month.

To compare that to my experience with Directv is not even a fair comparison. All I do now is turn on my tv and everything works as advertised. No resets, no waiting for upgrades to fix basic problems. The basic problems never existed. I haven't had to RMA any of my receivers, and I have three Ultimatetv PVR's and one standard RCA receiver. I can change my programming package without being charged a fee and the CSR's are even nice about it. I can change my package - including downgrades - using the webpage. Just quality products that work as advertised and no empty promises and vaporware. Perhaps D* did take their dispute with PAX public - I don't remember and I didn't care because I have a local PAX affiliate.

To say that Murdoch is going to ruin tv, and he is an evil dictator may not be fair. Has he said anything to make anyone here think that he is going to gouge other service providers? Has he said that he is going to be anti-competitive and try to have a monopoly on DBS service? If so, lets see a link or a quote. Charlie and Rupert are both very successful businessmen who got there from being smart and ruthless. They both have a very different style and I think both DBS providers will continue to be very competitive and successful.

As far as piracy goes, prosecute the *******s that are stealing service. Prosecute those who are giving information on how to pirate service. They are accessories after the fact and should be treated as such. Pirates suck!

[Mike123abc]

Charlie cares about his customers because he knows where the money is. He also knows the best way to get more customers is to try to be the low price leader (yes I know he is not in some packages, but is in some areas).

Keeping the price down by any means necessary is a way to keep customers.

[Jacob S]

I think there should possibly be an additional package come out, one that has fewer channels in it for a cheaper price that is even more basic. One could package that with their locals and Dish would still make a good amount on it. Some cable companies have packages like these and Dish should do this to look as if they are the low price leader and compete with Rainbow DBS better when they come out.

[UnnDunn]

Remember this is the exact way it played out in the UK a few years ago, he just ate up the competition! (BSB) and renamed it BSKYB
Actually BSB and Sky decided to merge because both were bleeding money and it was clear the UK market wasn't big enough for both of them. Sky became the surviving brand because Sky was more popular at the time.

[markh]

Karl, I'm not trying to pizz you off:) I started off with just a 3700, lightning fried it, then I bought a 4700 to replace it. Added a 2800 for $60 when Sears had them on clearance. I haven't had any problem with any of my receivers that would keep me from watching TV. The most annoying thing that has happened to me in almost 4 years is when the 4700 was upgraded to a 4900 and OpenTV, it would hang up on the weather feature of Open TV.

I don't think Charlie is my friend, I know he just wants my money:) I could switch to D* with no problem if I have to, but I would miss AT150 for the value it gives me. If I switched I would have to get TC+ and Starz and that would cost me slightly more than what I pay now. I don't have a PVR, but have been considering getting a 508, but want to remain a happy customer, so I'm hesitant about getting one.:)

I just don't understand everybody's problem with E*. Karl your experience with E* and mine have been totally different. Nobody has ever suggested I sign up for Credit Card Autopay and all the CSRs I have talked to have been friendly and helpful.

BTW, D* had a channel that ran a message saying PAX was going away, Charlie always mentions Programming disputes on Chats, and who watches them anyway?:)

I didn't say that Murdoch was going to ruin TV, I just think that vertical integration is as bad as a horizontal integration of sat TV.