Should the Satellite companies be concerned about cable?

[zipbags]

A few years ago switching from cable to a satellite company was a no brainer once I got my local channels. And it seems like most people were switching to satellite at a huge rate. Now, with the cable companies providing content comparable to satellite services. My father and a couple of friends are or have switched back to cable. Most were getting good deals and equipment that the satellite companies weren't matching..plus the programming was the same or even better. I wonder if satellite companies are worried? Just curious to what others here think? And does anyone have any idea what the satellite companies (Directv in particular) plan to do...if anything?

[Stewart Vernon]

A few years ago switching from cable to a satellite company was a no brainer once I got my local channels. And it seems like most people were switching to satellite at a huge rate. Now, with the cable companies providing content comparable to satellite services. My father and a couple of friends are or have switched back to cable. Most were getting good deals and equipment that the satellite companies weren't matching..plus the programming was the same or even better. I wonder if satellite companies are worried? Just curious to what others here think? And does anyone have any idea what the satellite companies (Directv in particular) plan to do...if anything?

No moreso than usual.

I have a Food Lion, Target Superstore, Wal-Mart Super Center, Kroger, Winn Dixie, and probably a dozen more choices for groceries where I live... but when Food Lion has a sale on canned corn, the other stores don't panic that everyone will switch.

Unless cable OR satellite gains a distinct and obvious advantage over a competitor, I think there's enough customers to go around.

[SamC]

Now, with the cable companies providing content comparable to satellite services.

Change that sentance to SOME cable companies in SOME areas, and you see the natural advantage of DBS.

If you live in the upper-middle class suburbs of major cites, or in the high rent district of downtown, then cable might almost equal DBS.

Everywhere else it does not. DBS remains a technology for the rest of us.

What should DBS do? Nothing. Except realize that its can have an eternal war in the suburbs, splitting and re-splitting the same market over and over. Or it can focus its efforts on everybody else, which is a whole lot more people.

[Nick]

In general, many cablecos have made significant improvement in plant and program offerings over the past few years, including here in my local Adelphia franchise area. The tipping point for me personally was when Adelphia ran fiber from three broadcasters' distribution links west of Jacksonville, Florida to Adelphia's head-end here Brunswick, Georgia, in order to begin providing locals in high definition.

That decision on the part of Adelphia, particularly in the midst of the muck and mire of messy legal proceedings, along with recent upgrades to plant and distribution lines told me that they were committed to delivering a high-quality digital picture and would likely be aggressive with respect to future HD offerings.

I made the switch back to cable a few months ago (see thread (http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=47079&highlight=Adelphia)), but only because the local cable 'picture' (no pun intended), that is, programming, PQ and service, was so much better here than what I had previously been familiar with from cablecos in the Atlanta area, at least up until the point when I subbed to Dish in 2000.

When (and if) other cablecos choose to follow similar paths to improvement to both product and services, combined with the exercise of restraint with respect to rate increases, then, in my opinion, DBS providers will begin to see a measurable exodus of subscribers opting for the simplicity of cable.

Here are the primary factors* influencing my decision to go back to the dark side:


comparable programming
local network affiliates in HD (ABC, NBC, FOX)
28 more premium movie channels
HD DVR (bug-free so far)
no upfront investment in equipment
no cost to upgrade or replace gear
broadband bundle savings
simplicity compared to DBS installation
excellent local service
overall savings of $30 per month

*These are my reasons based on my own personal experience with the local Adelphia cable franchise,
..and are not necessarily applicable to other subscribers with the same or different cable providers.

[tomcrown1]

The other thing DBS providers should be concern about is that cable have an aggressive sales force. In the SF Bay area if Comstact see a DBS dish on any home they will offer a year special rate that beats DBS rate by as much as $30 a month. If comstact is smart and start to move to fiber optic cable DBS service will become history.

[AllieVi]

*These are my reasons based on my own personal experience with the local Adelphia cable franchise, and are not necessarily applicable to other subscribers with the same or different cable providers.I expect other cable companies to go this route, too. "Cable" is evolving to a much better product and a significant competition to satellite.

[Geronimo]

I think that everyone has to look at what is important to them and what the cost is. I think Nick laid out an exellent example of why cable was right for him. I suspect that he is not alone in conccluding that it is the right choice.

So yes satellite needs to look at the competition. I live in an area with an expensive cable provider but I could easily go back for the right offer.

[Stewart Vernon]

Here are the primary factors* influencing my decision to go back to the dark side:

comparable programming
local network affiliates in HD (ABC, NBC, FOX)
28 more premium movie channels
HD DVR (bug-free so far)
no upfront investment in equipment
no cost to upgrade or replace gear
broadband bundle savings
simplicity compared to DBS installation
excellent local service
overall savings of $30 per month

Each cable company seems to have different advantages and disadvantages when compared to DBS... and even the same cable company is different in different markets. Using the same kinds of comparisons above, here's what I came up with regarding Time Warner in my area vs DBS:


Comparable programming if you don't consider Voom channels, ESPN2HD, or UniversalHD
Most locals in HD (Sinclair owns my local WB and UPN so those are not available via cable here)
Upgrades do cost a service charge of $40 or so for some types of upgrades that do not permit customers to go to the local office for pickup
Broadband not as reliable as DSL in my area, so bundle price doesn't make up for downtime
My house doesn't have cable ran to it yet (new construction), and would require cable to dig up & bury good portion of my yard and possibly disrupt my concrete driveway to get to the side of my house from junction box (much more complicated than sticking a dish on the house and dropping the cables to the connections)
Channels from 70 and below are analog even with digital tier, and are not clear compared to DBS. Also service is unreliable during thunderstorms or rain, especially in the summer
Price compares about the same for comparable packages
No upfront costs

[FTA Michael]

(shrug) The DBS companies are talking more about bundling internet or phone service through deals with local telcos. Dish just invested in Slingbox, which could improve what its receivers can do. They add channels and stay competitive on price.

My "Why I Stay With Dish" list has some Dish-only benefits:

* Fewer outages than my local cable service
* More channels, including lots of public interest channels
* The sports pack, which has more content than cable's extra Fox Sports Net channels
* The superstations
* Alternate channels, particularly ESPN during baseball season
* Huge set of music channels, including Sirius
* Lower price

YMMV of course.