1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Welcome to the new DBSTalk community platform. We have recently migrated to a community platform called Xenfono and hope you will find this change to your liking. There are some differences, but for the most part, if you just post and read, that will all be the same. If you have questions, please post them in the Forum Support area. Thanks!

ACA urges FCC to make DirecTV and Dish pay regulatory fees

Discussion in 'General Satellite Discussion' started by Athlon646464, Jul 10, 2014.

  1. Athlon646464

    Athlon646464 Gold Members DBSTalk Gold Club

    3,045
    66
    Feb 23, 2007
    Uxbridge, MA
    ACA urges FCC to make DirecTV and Dish pay regulatory fees

    (FierceCable.com) - The American Cable Association is petitioning the Federal Communications Commission to impose regulatory fees on DBS providers DirecTV and Dish Network equal to those currently charged to cable providers.

    Currently, DirecTV and Dish pay less burdensome regulatory fees as satellite operators, which amount to about 6 cents per every subscriber, according to the ACA....

    Full Story Here

    [​IMG]
     
  2. damondlt

    damondlt New Member

    5,455
    232
    Feb 27, 2006
    Newfoundland...
    GREAT here we go with more fees. Just what we need.
     
  3. MysteryMan

    MysteryMan DIRECTV A-Team DBSTalk Club

    8,223
    443
    May 17, 2010
    USA
    The ACA is looking for a easy out rather than making their service more competitive.
     
  4. SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    6,255
    133
    Jun 6, 2009
    ACA, NABA, MPAA, RIAA, BSA, AARP

    Why do letters make people so full of themselves?
     
  5. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    6,548
    604
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Post-merger, perhaps AT&T will end up having to pay the "cable" fee for all Directv customers anyway, depending on how the law is written.
     
  6. jpl

    jpl Hall Of Fame

    2,776
    6
    Jul 9, 2006
    I'm not sure how what you're saying makes sense. The FCC charges these fees and they charge less to DBS than they do to cable. The ACA is basically just asking the FCC to level the playing field with regard to the fees that the FCC charges. This has nothing to do with these companies making themselves more competitive. The only way the cable companies can really do that... is if they pay the same fees as the DBS companies.
     
    1 person likes this.
  7. acostapimps

    acostapimps Hall Of Famer

    1,866
    50
    Nov 5, 2011
    Illinois
    They should add a BWC Because We Can fees.
     
  8. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    21,192
    182
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    The fee has to be for something. The ACA needs to tell us why (other than competitive reasons).
     
  9. damondlt

    damondlt New Member

    5,455
    232
    Feb 27, 2006
    Newfoundland...
    It's a dollar, they don't tell us anything!
     
  10. damondlt

    damondlt New Member

    5,455
    232
    Feb 27, 2006
    Newfoundland...
    Agree, and we are talking about $1
    If any thing it's Directv who needs to improve their product for what we already pay.
     
  11. yosoyellobo

    yosoyellobo Icon

    2,692
    154
    Nov 1, 2006
    Jacksonville Fl
    It's an government agency. I am sure they will find a way to spend it. :)
     
    1 person likes this.
  12. jpl

    jpl Hall Of Fame

    2,776
    6
    Jul 9, 2006
    I don't think this makes sense either. They need to explain why they don't want to be charged more by the government than their competition? Really? I think it's pretty self-evident. The FCC charges DBS providers less than they charge cable companies... even though they're supposed to be in the same business. I think it's incumbent on the FCC to explain why, after they've worked to try to level the playing field in other regards, they charge cable companies more. In fact, I would go further - there are legal requirements on cable companies that don't exist against other similar types of providers. If the FCC is interested in trying to create a more level playing field then they need to justify why one sector of the industry deserves to pay more than the other sectors. BTW, I'm not advocating that the FCC raise the DBS fees. I think they should lower them (hell, eliminate them) across the board. And yeah, it's only a dollar... but it's a dollar per subscriber. How many households have cable/satellite? 100 million? Wonder why the FCC charges that fee...
     
  13. inkahauts

    inkahauts DIRECTV A-Team

    21,512
    956
    Nov 13, 2006
    Do you know why they put all those restrictions and charges on cable companies and did not on Satellite companies? There is good reason that cable companies or more heavily regulated in some ways than Satellite companies are, and I see no reason that Sat companies should have to pay the same as cable companies since they are so much harder to control than Sat companies.
     
  14. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Leapin' Lizard Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,457
    358
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    One nugget to get out there, and I don't know if it applies to the conversation here... but since it might.

    Be careful about "FCC fees"... because there are fees that show up on utility bills that are labeled as an "FCC" fee that are nothing of the kind. I went through this with a phone company many years ago where they insisted that the FCC "required" them to charge a particular fee. A little digging, and talking with the FCC... and the truth was, the phone company wanted to charge a fee and they wanted to charge more BUT the FCC said "no, we will allow you to charge your customers for this thing you have deemed necessary but your fee cannot exceed $5"... so in truth, it was purely a phone company fee but they didn't like the FCC putting a cap on what they could charge, so they called it a "FCC Access Fee" or some other such nonsense.

    That said...

    Any actual regulatory fees charged to satellite or cable, might necessarily be different because of the ways these companies operate. For the most part Dish and DirecTV do not have a significant presence in most of the states where they provide service. Whereas the cable company does have significant presence everything that they provide service. It stands to reason that this would result in more regulation of the cable company than a satellite company.

    It's a whole different discussion IF someone brings up a problem that further regulation might help OR reducing regulation might help... but I can't say off-hand that both companies should be regulated the same.
     
  15. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    21,192
    182
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    We need to be certain that these "fees" that we're talking about are what we think they are.

    I suspect that what the ACA (and NCTA) is after is recovery on their franchise fees, not some mystery fee that is being charged by a state or federal government. Franchise fees are fees that the cablecos pay for their exclusive rights to operate in a jurisdiction as well as the "rent" on passage of their transmission lines through public rights-of-way.

    There is no analog to franchising for satellite.
     
  16. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    21,192
    182
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    I've known about these "cost recovery fees" from the beginning and I'm still not happy about it. You're right about the companies lying through their teeth about them being required. I get that pitch all the time from sales weasels. I have to remind them that most of these fees are "allowed" as opposed to "mandated".
     
  17. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    44,899
    860
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    You suspect incorrectly. As clearly stated in the article: "Currently, cable operators pay a regulatory fee to the FCC of about $1 per subscriber--a charge that dropped from around $1.02 per sub in 2013, when the FCC started charging Internet protocol TV (IPTV) operators regulatory fees."

    They are talking about a fee charged by the federal government, not local franchise fees.
     
  18. damondlt

    damondlt New Member

    5,455
    232
    Feb 27, 2006
    Newfoundland...
    Our cable TV services have FCC and Local franchise Fees.

    Our Internet has none of these fees.
     
  19. tsmacro

    tsmacro Hall Of Fame

    2,364
    54
    Apr 28, 2005
    East...
    Satellite and cable have always been regulated differently, not saying that it is good but it's true. Just look at the rules that satellite has to deal with when it comes to locals that cable doesn't have to deal with. So sure if your going to "level the playing field" then lets not just look at fees but also the regulations themselves, after all cable companies don't have to worry about DMA's and where those lines are drawn, they're allowed to offer any locals that make sense for the area they serve.
     
  20. damondlt

    damondlt New Member

    5,455
    232
    Feb 27, 2006
    Newfoundland...
    They are tightening their belts on those DMA rules even with cable.
    Our local cable lost 3 networks in the past 2 years to the dreaded networks crying over territories.
     

Share This Page