Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo

IF DIRECTV were concerned about the Roku threat how do they feel about this?


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#21 OFFLINE   MCHuf

MCHuf

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 147 posts
Joined: Oct 09, 2011

Posted 05 June 2012 - 07:16 AM

For the moment, you still need to be subscribed to a TV service in order to use the XBox video services like ESPN. So this is not a cord cutting tool. Frankly, though, neither is HBO GO on Roku.


You don't need a pay-tv subscription to get ESPN 3. I had U-Verse for internet/phone and ota for tv and ATT gave me ESPN 3(60). I now have Wide Open West for those services and E* for tv and I still get ESPN 3.

If you need to be current and willing to pay on a per episode basis, you can watch quite a bit current pay-tv (non-premium) programming through Amazon. So the landscape is slowly but surely changing. For example if you subscribe to a particular show, Amazon gives you a 5% discount. So a 16 episode series will cost you $45.44 in hd and $30.24 in sd. Pretty pricey, but if you only follow 10 - 15 non-ota network series, you can save money compared to a full pay-tv package. Add in Netflix for $16 per month (streaming + 1 disc by mail) plus ota, you can cut your tv costs while tailoring your tv package to your tastes. Of course the weakness of this plan is sports programing. But for most people, life is all about compromises.

Edited by MCHuf, 05 June 2012 - 07:44 AM.


...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#22 OFFLINE   Darcaine

Darcaine

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 103 posts
Joined: Aug 31, 2009

Posted 05 June 2012 - 11:38 PM

Here's a couple interesting articles on the potential future of tv.

http://www.techdirt....004194221.shtml

http://www.businessi...collapse-2012-6

http://www.techdirt....-collapse.shtml

Things aren't exactly looking bright for the future of the legacy TV model.

#23 OFFLINE   Shades228

Shades228

    Hall Of Fame

  • Banned User
  • 5,914 posts
Joined: Mar 18, 2008

Posted 06 June 2012 - 03:47 AM

Here's a couple interesting articles on the potential future of tv.

http://www.techdirt....004194221.shtml

http://www.businessi...collapse-2012-6

http://www.techdirt....-collapse.shtml

Things aren't exactly looking bright for the future of the legacy TV model.


All of these compare TV to newspapers online. It's not the same at all. Newspapers died because the majority of people stopped caring about newspapers. They just wanted blogs and articles. Real journalism is left as a fine dining experience now and most people just go for the fast food of bloggers with an opinion(much like all of these articles). These people don't care because all it is about is page hits not anything real.


Everyone said youtube was going to be the death of the TV model because people could make their own shows and people would subscribe to them. How's that working out so far?

One day, far away, IPTV will be the mainstream. It will be because the technology will exist for people to provide it at a cost that's reasonable and everyone will be connected. However that model is a blip on the radar. Content providers cannot go out on their own right now. If they could they wouldn't be taking their channels down for $.30 a subscriber.

Now the real issue is people have this garden of eden mantra about IPTV. It will give you everything you want and you will pay next to nothing for it. How's that working out for online retail?

I've said this before and I'm sure I'll say it again. For every reason that you want something to happen because you say it will cost less is another reason why the content providers won't do it. They're not there for you. They're there for the shareholders who demand profits.
All comments are my own. Unless specifically stated, my views do NOT represent the views of DIRECTV

#24 OFFLINE   dualsub2006

dualsub2006

    Icon

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 845 posts
Joined: Aug 28, 2007

Posted 06 June 2012 - 08:22 AM

I've said this before and I'm sure I'll say it again. For every reason that you want something to happen because you say it will cost less is another reason why the content providers won't do it. They're not there for you. They're there for the shareholders who demand profits.

I don't know who this is directed at, but MS wasn't talking about cheap, over the top content, they were talking about becoming a pay TV provider and delivering your subscription via Xbox Live.

You're right, people have these pipe dreams about over the top, but that's not the point here.

The point is that the best guess for why D* blocks HBO Go on the Roku was that D* sees Roku as a threat, but allows it on the Xbox because they see MS as a partner.

That partner, Microsoft, has a stated goal of winning the living room with the Xbox. As late as December 2011 they talked openly about wanting to provide pay TV networks via Xbox Live.

D* and other MSOs are allowing MS to gauge interest in pay TV services on Xbox Live with HBO Go and Watch ESPN, but the Roku gets blocked.

Roku doesn't sell TV packages and Roku doesn't deliver any of the content that people watch on the device, but they are a threat. MS is a partner.

Meanwhile, D* welcomed the dirtiest player in the game to the table. Pipe dreams aside, IF Microsoft decides to offer pay TV service through Xbox Live then traditional MSOs are going to have a serious problem.

And D* won't have anyone to blame for their losses but themselves. And they'll STILL block HBO Go access on the Roku.

#25 OFFLINE   Shades228

Shades228

    Hall Of Fame

  • Banned User
  • 5,914 posts
Joined: Mar 18, 2008

Posted 06 June 2012 - 11:46 AM

I don't know who this is directed at, but MS wasn't talking about cheap, over the top content, they were talking about becoming a pay TV provider and delivering your subscription via Xbox Live.

You're right, people have these pipe dreams about over the top, but that's not the point here.

The point is that the best guess for why D* blocks HBO Go on the Roku was that D* sees Roku as a threat, but allows it on the Xbox because they see MS as a partner.

That partner, Microsoft, has a stated goal of winning the living room with the Xbox. As late as December 2011 they talked openly about wanting to provide pay TV networks via Xbox Live.

D* and other MSOs are allowing MS to gauge interest in pay TV services on Xbox Live with HBO Go and Watch ESPN, but the Roku gets blocked.

Roku doesn't sell TV packages and Roku doesn't deliver any of the content that people watch on the device, but they are a threat. MS is a partner.

Meanwhile, D* welcomed the dirtiest player in the game to the table. Pipe dreams aside, IF Microsoft decides to offer pay TV service through Xbox Live then traditional MSOs are going to have a serious problem.

And D* won't have anyone to blame for their losses but themselves. And they'll STILL block HBO Go access on the Roku.


Microsoft is not attempting to become MVPD. They are attempting to become a portal for other companies. Hence the Xinfinity and FIOS apps rather than a link to a bunch of channels independently.
All comments are my own. Unless specifically stated, my views do NOT represent the views of DIRECTV

#26 OFFLINE   Beerstalker

Beerstalker

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,988 posts
Joined: Feb 09, 2009

Posted 07 June 2012 - 01:37 PM

Actually Microsoft was looking to be a provider, much like Apple has been. But as far as I know both have backed off on it for now. They wanted to have channels/apps that you could subscribe to directly from them. So if you wanted HBO you would subscribe to HBO though them and get an HBO app on your X-Box/iPhone that gave you access to their content. Kind of like HBO Go now, but without having to have a subscription to it thought Comcast/DirecTV, etc.

They wanted to do it for all channels, so you could have a Fox app that might give you access to Fox shows, a USA app for USA shows, etc. They wanted to break it up so you only had to subscribe to the channels you watched. So if you only watch sports you could just subsribe to ESPN, Fox Sports, and stuff like that without having to subscribe to get ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, USA, TBS, etc. But when they started talking to the actual channel providers they found out that it was going to cost them way more money than they expected, and the channel providers wanted to bundle everything together still like they try to do with the Major providers now. If you want ESPN you have to get ABC, Disney, etc. So they have dropped the idea for now, but I wouldn't be suprised if they try again in the future.
Sometimes when I reflect back on all the beer I drink I feel ashamed. Then I look into the glass and think about the workers in the brewery and all of their hopes and dreams. If I didn’t drink this beer, they might be out of work and their dreams would be shattered. Then I say to myself, "It is better that I drink this beer and let their dreams come true than be selfish and worry about my liver."
-by Jack Handy

#27 OFFLINE   smitbret

smitbret

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 130 posts
Joined: Mar 26, 2011

Posted 09 June 2012 - 09:26 AM

Actually Microsoft was looking to be a provider, much like Apple has been. But as far as I know both have backed off on it for now. They wanted to have channels/apps that you could subscribe to directly from them. So if you wanted HBO you would subscribe to HBO though them and get an HBO app on your X-Box/iPhone that gave you access to their content. Kind of like HBO Go now, but without having to have a subscription to it thought Comcast/DirecTV, etc.

They wanted to do it for all channels, so you could have a Fox app that might give you access to Fox shows, a USA app for USA shows, etc. They wanted to break it up so you only had to subscribe to the channels you watched. So if you only watch sports you could just subsribe to ESPN, Fox Sports, and stuff like that without having to subscribe to get ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, USA, TBS, etc. But when they started talking to the actual channel providers they found out that it was going to cost them way more money than they expected, and the channel providers wanted to bundle everything together still like they try to do with the Major providers now. If you want ESPN you have to get ABC, Disney, etc. So they have dropped the idea for now, but I wouldn't be suprised if they try again in the future.


Hopefully, this all lead to a la carte programming from the major providers.

#28 OFFLINE   dualsub2006

dualsub2006

    Icon

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 845 posts
Joined: Aug 28, 2007

Posted 09 June 2012 - 08:53 PM

Hopefully, this all lead to a la carte programming from the major providers.


Do you realize how much that would cost you?

#29 OFFLINE   dualsub2006

dualsub2006

    Icon

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 845 posts
Joined: Aug 28, 2007

Posted 09 June 2012 - 09:03 PM

Actually Microsoft was looking to be a provider, much like Apple has been. But as far as I know both have backed off on it for now.


MS did want to become a provider. Google it, they stated openly that they were in discussions with the major pay TV networks to bring them to Xbox Live. It isn't a belief that they were about to do it, they were trying to work it out.

Yes, Microsoft said that they were giving up because it was too expensive. Given how much they've already lost on the Xbox I would be shocked if they would be willing to let a little thing like money stop their goal to own the living room.

My own belief is that after MS can show millions of users watching these pay TV offerings provided by D* and others, they believe that they will be in a better position to negotiate rates. I'll be stunned if MS doesn't try again with pay TV. And soon.

Meanwhile, D* still blocks HBO Go access on the Roku.

#30 OFFLINE   dualsub2006

dualsub2006

    Icon

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 845 posts
Joined: Aug 28, 2007

Posted 11 July 2012 - 07:21 AM

Well, after spending a few months working around the fact that D* blocks HBO Go on the Roku, I see now that my local cable company Insight/Time Warner now offers HBO Go streaming that D* blocks.

I've made a call this morning to see what my cost would be to move all of my movie channels to Insight and how the two combined will affect my total TV expense.

I actually wouldn't mind having a few of the new Tivo DVRs. The one I encountered recently was really nice, and much faster than I expected.




Protected By... spam firewall...And...