1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

DirecTV/Viacom Dispute?

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by danpeters, Jul 9, 2012.

  1. Blurayfan

    Blurayfan Hall Of Fame

    1,758
    8
    Nov 16, 2005
    Illinois
    if no deal is done Viacom stands to lose what DirecTV was paying them, estimated at 500 million a year.

    DirecTV could lose some due to subscriber churn from the dispute, but they get to use the revenue that would have gone to Viacom anyway they want. Invest in new infrastructure upgrades, offset the loss of income from the churn.
     
  2. HuskerHarley

    HuskerHarley AllStar

    57
    0
    Feb 8, 2012
    CS-->"We're cool."-->:goodjob:

    HH
     
  3. dpeters11

    dpeters11 Hall Of Fame

    16,251
    490
    May 30, 2007
    Cincinnati
    I think it's a videophile/audiophile thing. The differences may be there, but not everyone notices them. Either that or it's more noticeable on really big screens.
     
  4. ChicagoBlue

    ChicagoBlue Godfather

    303
    0
    Apr 29, 2011
    Did you ever think that it could be a two part process? Launch Disney Jr today in SD and when HD capacity becomes available later in the year or next year they will launch the HD version?

    The first MAJOR launch was in 2007. Look, I've been in this business for almost 3 decades, I know what I'm talking about. Look it up, most US based HD channels started launching in 2007 and guess who was the driver in that? DIRECTV was. I know, because at the time we were working with DIRECTV as was everyone else to get those channels launched.

    You can talk all you want about the one offs in 2004 and 2005, those were exactly what they were, one offs. I remember DTV having HBO in HD in 2003. DTV had ESPN HD in 2003. So what, that's not when the major push started which was 2007.

    A few examples

    CNN HD- Sept 2007
    Cartoon Network - Oct 2007
    Bravo HD - Oct 2007
    CBS College Sports Network HD - 2008
    Animal Planet HD - Sept 2007
    A&E HD- Sept 2006
    MSNBC HD- June 2009
    National Geographic HD- 2006
    USA Network HD - Oct 2007
    Weather Channel HD - Sept 2007
    Travel Channel HD - Jan 2008
    DIY HD - 2010
    Disney Channel HD - March 2008
    Discovery Channel HD - Aug 2007
    ABC Family HD - Jan 2008
    Comedy Central HD - Jan 2009
    Food Network HD - Mar 2008
    HGTV HD - Mar 2008
    Golf Channel HD - 2007
    Fox News Channel HD - May 2008
    Speed HD - Feb 2008
    CNBC HD - Oct 2007


    I could go on and on, but the evidence is overwhelming. Sure, some launched in the early 2000's, but the vast majority came 2007 and later.
     
  5. ChicagoBlue

    ChicagoBlue Godfather

    303
    0
    Apr 29, 2011
    SusanMark, most new DTV customers come aboard with HD. That isn't the issue, there are still millions of homes in this country with SD televisions. Millions...regardless if you are a cable, Dish, Telco customer, etc. You might have nothing but HD televisions in your home, but you can't believe how many people have SD televisions still. That isn't a DTV customer thing, that is a United States thing. Or the more appropriate comparison is how many have A HD television, but still have a SD television(s) in the bedroom or the den, etc.

    DTV is very much at the cutting edge in HD...MPEG 4 (many other distributors still using MPEG2 HD), they don't overcompress, 1080P for some HD content, etc. Some have complained about less HD basic channels. Of course, to be fair, DTV has more HD in other areas (sports, premiums, etc) than most providers. That's how DTV has decided to use their bandwidth.

    I think if you look through the history of channel dropping there is no comparison. Everyone has dropped some, either be an out in their contract (ATT Uverse with ESPN3D) or through negotiations breaking down (DISH, Comcast, etc, etc, etc).

    As far as customer service, DTV is routinely ranked 1 or 2 in the industry. It's a tough job and they do a very good job at it, but certainly no one is perfect and there is always room for improvement. When you get paid $9 an hour you have high turnover and new people coming on board all the time. Nature of the beast.

    As for your $75 10 years ago and now $200, kind of funny when the major force in driving that cost up has been programming costs. NFL 10 years ago cost DTV about $250 million a year. Now it's a billion a year. ESPN was about $1.50 a sub, now it's over $4.00 a sub.

    You complain that DTV isn't watching your back because the channels came down. Who demanded the channels came down? Viacom, not DTV. Secondly, not everyone is as well off as you are to be paying what you are and they have to answer to all customers, not just the ones on the high end. There isn't a provider you can go to that doesn't run into this.
     
  6. tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Viacom has the advertiser pressure too.

    Right now, directv is losing in rebates and whatever churn happens and potential loss but new customers but that is longer term. Viacom is losing directvs fees and the ratings are plummeting with 20 mil fewer households meaning make goods and rebates to advertisers.

    Short term, Viacom hurts more. Long term, directv takes more of a hit potentially. This dispute stays short, pressure is on Viacom. Months or longer, the pressure may begin to shift.
     
  7. mystro

    mystro New Member

    9
    0
    Oct 16, 2007
    An uncompressed direct OTA signal..I'm using a Clearstream 2 no booster needed at my location but it's a well designed antenna from Costco.
     
  8. dpeters11

    dpeters11 Hall Of Fame

    16,251
    490
    May 30, 2007
    Cincinnati
    40% of new customers are SD. Still a pretty big number.
     
  9. RunnerFL

    RunnerFL Well-Known Member

    17,054
    311
    Jan 4, 2006
    OTA definitely has a better picture than what we get from the satellites. As he pointed out OTA is not compressed whereas satellite is. I notice a definite difference between the two.
     
  10. Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,243
    553
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    I was asking about monitor. With digital, if you get the OTA signal, you get it. My antenna is 30 years old, I get a great picture with my SF locals. But it's not discernably better than DIRECTV®.

    How do you measure the better picture? How much better would you say? And why? Sharper? More saturation? Fewer artifacts? Fewer ads? :D

    Again, your TV (monitor) will play a role in what you see.
     
  11. Whogaman

    Whogaman Cool Member

    27
    0
    Feb 6, 2008
    I haven't read every response on this thread, and if what I'm about to say has been posted, I apologise.

    I have been thinking about why Viacon wants to raise what it charges D* to carry it's channels. My answer is to look at what the "talent" is being paid. (And I use the term 'talent' loosely.) Jersey Shore's "stars" get a million dollars a year each for showing bad behavior. The Walking Dad and Breaking Bad are to popular shows on AMC. Even TNA Wrestling had a large following.

    All this programming doesn't come cheep. Shows on Comedy Central must cost quite a bit to produce seeing that those programs like the Daily Show are so popular.

    Look, I don't like the prospect of paying more for things I have no interest in, but those are the facts of life in this case. If Viacom is to survive, it's going to have to get revenue from viewers that commercials are aimed at, and they most likely can't survive without the 20 million or so subscribers that D* represents. So I guess we are going to have to hitch up our drawers and simply get ready to pay a premium for channels that some do not want to watch. :mad:

    Peace Whoga
     
  12. BattleScott

    BattleScott Hall Of Fame

    2,353
    7
    Aug 28, 2006
    Well, you can frame or disguise the duck any way you like I suppose, whatever helps you sleep. Directv doesn't "have" to deal with me, that is their primary function. All of those nuisance tasks you pointed out are an integral part, and cost of the business you have chosen, along with the payment to the content owners that provide the reason for your existence. As I said before, when your financials begin to reflect the despair you project, then I'll start to feel bad for you.
     
  13. Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,243
    553
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    Some OTA is compressed, but I think you know that.

    Same questions of other guy: What TV?
     
  14. ChicagoBlue

    ChicagoBlue Godfather

    303
    0
    Apr 29, 2011
    Where have you seen that number? That isn't consistent with what I have seen in the industry, closer to 15 to 20% but you may have a different source.
     
  15. BattleScott

    BattleScott Hall Of Fame

    2,353
    7
    Aug 28, 2006
    We are not allowed to consider those points, sorry.
    Content owners = villian / DirecTV = hero
     
  16. ChicagoBlue

    ChicagoBlue Godfather

    303
    0
    Apr 29, 2011
    Programming costs going up double digits each year, can only pass on 4% to 5% increase in costs to subscribers. As a result, margins go down.

    You obviously aren't looking at the right financials, the ones that are most important. People tend to look at revenues and get all happy slappy but they don't look at costs or operating margins which is what makes a business go. DTV's operating margins are decreasing, that is the number you should be focusing on. At least in the States, in Latin America they are growing like gangbusters but that comes at a huge cash outlay expense as well. The States are a different story, it is a mature business with costs increasing tremendously.

    I am curious as to why you seem to pit DTV as the bad guy in all of this and you have done it consistently n your posts over the months and years. Both are culpable to a point, but as any distributor in any business can tell you, the source cost of the products they are selling is what makes them or breaks them. If costs are going up then that is a problem, a big problem since they own the relationship with the customer.
     
  17. Mariah2014

    Mariah2014 Breaking the mold

    843
    5
    Apr 21, 2006
    Somewhere...
    Which means we will have to see them go ala carte or you will see many cut the cord due to the cost. Most people can't afford their cable bill to look like a car or mortgage payment.
     
  18. RunnerFL

    RunnerFL Well-Known Member

    17,054
    311
    Jan 4, 2006
    67" Samsung

    Colors are brighter, less artifacts, sharper picture with OTA.

    I can use my HR34 to bring up an OTA channel and Sat channel in PIP to compare them and you can clearly see the difference.
     
  19. davring

    davring Hall Of Fame

    6,417
    1
    Jan 13, 2007
    OTA HD uses MPEG2 compression.
     
  20. dpeters11

    dpeters11 Hall Of Fame

    16,251
    490
    May 30, 2007
    Cincinnati
    DirecTV FCC filing. Admittedly, it was filed back in May, part of the request to launch DirecTV14.


    http://www.dbstalk.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=29180&d=1337492070

    From page 2
    "Nearly 60% of new DIRECTV subscribers, and over 50% of the total DIRECTV customer base, subscribe to HD services."

    Unless their definition of new customer is over he last seven years or something.
     

Share This Page