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
- - - - -

Intel to Offer A La Cart?


  • Please log in to reply
458 replies to this topic

#101 OFFLINE   harsh

harsh

    Beware the Attack Basset

  • Registered
  • 19,421 posts
  • LocationSalem, OR
Joined: Jun 14, 2003

Posted 08 January 2013 - 08:37 AM

It's humorous that you believe that. Charlie is your white knight.

Do you remember the other provider that went before Congress to lobby for a la carte?

Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. -- JFK


...Ads Help To Support This Site...

#102 OFFLINE   unixguru

unixguru

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 579 posts
Joined: Jul 09, 2007

Posted 08 January 2013 - 08:39 AM

Paying for a season of anything is like paying for a song vs the entire album.


Another way in which movies aren't as different as they may appear...

How many successful movies do not come out with a sequel/prequel? Yep, that's right, movies are a series.

All video entertainment has a value per hour and it always declines as it becomes older.

#103 OFFLINE   JoeTheDragon

JoeTheDragon

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,253 posts
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Posted 08 January 2013 - 09:11 AM

Oops! Yes, of course.

So what is the speculation as to how much of the 4.5% is carriage fees? Let's guess 2/3 or 3%. That means that content is around 40% of a bill. And the delivery service is around 60%.

If I look at my bill that tells me I can save a huge amount of money using internet delivery. Even if I double my internet bandwidth.


and that shifts the costs for delivery down the line so the ISP will need to upgrade local areas to have more bandwidth to cover online TV.
I want CLTV / CLTV HD on direct tv.

#104 OFFLINE   FLWingNut

FLWingNut

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 422 posts
Joined: Nov 19, 2005

Posted 08 January 2013 - 09:18 AM

My teenager regularly goes browsing for music on iTunes. Then he mentions good stuff to us (we all happen to like jazz/sax). His friends also suggest things to him - probably let him listen to it on their device. He likes Piano Guys - found them on YouTube. My wife also browses for music, movies, and TV programs regularly. In other words, other than word-of-mouth, actively looking for stuff.

Seeing or hearing something passively as it goes by isn't the only way.


That all sounds very time-consuming and in this day, with all that people have going on, who, among adults, has time to sit down and actively look for music, TV, etc? We are a very passive country, and we tend to go with we know. I work hard on a daily basis, the last thing I want to do is work to find entertainment content.

Edited by FLWingNut, 08 January 2013 - 09:47 AM.


#105 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,705 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 08 January 2013 - 10:33 AM

Do you remember the other provider that went before Congress to lobby for a la carte?


For those of us who know that a la carte will actually cost us more, why would we cheer for someone to lobby for it?
LR: HR34-700, H24-200, Fios DVR, BD350 Blu Ray, Roku Netflix Player, Chromecast, Sony 65w850 TV
BR: HR21-200, Viso 32LX, DB350 Blu Ray
Dish: Slimline, SWM8
Other: genieGo

#106 OFFLINE   pdxBeav

pdxBeav

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 419 posts
Joined: Jul 05, 2007

Posted 08 January 2013 - 11:57 AM

For those of us who know that a la carte will actually cost us more, why would we cheer for someone to lobby for it?


!rolling

#107 OFFLINE   SayWhat?

SayWhat?

    Know Nothing

  • Registered
  • 5,718 posts
Joined: Jun 06, 2009

Posted 08 January 2013 - 03:57 PM

Why is this here and not in a non-provider specific section?
Help stamp out Twits and Twitterers!

HD, SchmacHD!! Just be glad you've got a picture at all.

#108 OFFLINE   Hoosier205

Hoosier205

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,596 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 08 January 2013 - 04:08 PM

Why is this here and not in a non-provider specific section?


Here, here...
DTV = Digital Television

#109 OFFLINE   fireponcoal

fireponcoal

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 725 posts
Joined: Sep 26, 2009

Posted 08 January 2013 - 07:41 PM

Last time I checked a la carte does exist in the form of the various private BitTorrent sites that exist and thrive. Simply keep that ratio kosher and all is well.

#110 OFFLINE   maartena

maartena

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,826 posts
Joined: Nov 01, 2010

Posted 09 January 2013 - 02:40 PM

From a technology perspective, absolutely. From a business perspective...will ESPN let themselves be contained in a sports only tier? Will CNN and FOX be contained in a news tier? What about a channel that does movies and family and something else? I don't know. Hard to see how that works.


Another thing is advertising income for small, obscure channels. A big company such as Discovery Communications has a few "high profile" channels such as Discovery Channel and TLC, but also has a number of "lesser" channels such as Military Channel and Fit&Health.

In negotiating with carriers, they will want to include the "lesser" channels in the deal as they know not a lot of people would actually want to pay for these channels individually, and they run a much better chance of someone seeing their advertisements if they can promote the channel on the high profile channels, or if it is placed very close in number to the high profile channels for those just flipping channels and stumbling on something interesting.

The few attempts I have seen at "a la carte" in Canada, Europe, and the U.S. usually end up offering you packages. A "viacom" package that includes ALL of the MTV/VH1 stuff, or a "discovery" package that includes ALL of the Discovery stuff.

The box Intel offers is not a breakthrough in technology, it really isn't much more than a glorified Roku that can do some more things. From a technological point a view, a box like this could have been launched 10 years ago. It isn't the technology that is allowing (or restricting) a a-la-carte type service, it is the companies who own the content. And these companies are not going to want to split up their channels and charge individually for them, as it will most certainly drop their viewership of each channel, including the high-profile ones. And less viewers is less advertisement is less money. They would have to price the channels so high to offset this loss in revenue, it really doesn't make any business sense.
[Disclaimer] The definition of "soon" is based solely on DirecTV's interpretation of the word, and all similarities with dictionary definitions of the word "soon" are purely coincidental and should not be interpreted as a time frame that will come to pass within a reasonable amount of time.

I am the Stig.

#111 OFFLINE   maartena

maartena

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,826 posts
Joined: Nov 01, 2010

Posted 09 January 2013 - 02:43 PM

Last time I checked a la carte does exist in the form of the various private BitTorrent sites that exist and thrive. Simply keep that ratio kosher and all is well.


Yes. But the content that can be downloaded via those sites is not offered with the consent of the owner of said content. One can argue the legality of a torrent site (as they actually do not store ANY content, just a link that allows hundreds of hosts to share said content), but having the content on your hard drive, and subsequently uploading it to others (to keep the ratio kosher) is copyright infringement and illegal under U.S. laws.
[Disclaimer] The definition of "soon" is based solely on DirecTV's interpretation of the word, and all similarities with dictionary definitions of the word "soon" are purely coincidental and should not be interpreted as a time frame that will come to pass within a reasonable amount of time.

I am the Stig.

#112 OFFLINE   fireponcoal

fireponcoal

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 725 posts
Joined: Sep 26, 2009

Posted 09 January 2013 - 05:38 PM

Yes. But the content that can be downloaded via those sites is not offered with the consent of the owner of said content. One can argue the legality of a torrent site (as they actually do not store ANY content, just a link that allows hundreds of hosts to share said content), but having the content on your hard drive, and subsequently uploading it to others (to keep the ratio kosher) is copyright infringement and illegal under U.S. laws.


But what if I subscribe to two providers and sub to every movie channel on one of those providers(fios)? Yeah, didn't think so but the practice continues and the communities thrive...Thanks for the quick lesson in US copyright law though..

Edited by fireponcoal, 11 January 2013 - 09:42 PM.


#113 OFFLINE   Satelliteracer

Satelliteracer

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 3,042 posts
Joined: Dec 06, 2006

Posted 10 January 2013 - 11:34 PM

Another interesting article on the topic


http://www.thestreet...?cm_ven=GOOGLEN
DIRECTV employee

All comments are my own. Unless specifically stated, my views do NOT represent the views of DIRECTV

#114 OFFLINE   unixguru

unixguru

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 579 posts
Joined: Jul 09, 2007

Posted 11 January 2013 - 09:03 AM

Another interesting article on the topic

http://www.thestreet...?cm_ven=GOOGLEN


Hulu (Plus) fails to reach critical mass in features. That doesn't automatically mean the concept is rejected by consumers.

Just a quick check of their capabilities (their web site is strangely devoid of information) shows a few killers: 1) only streaming [supported on TiVo but it sounds like you can't use DVR functionality with their content], 2) no CBS network, 3) max 720p ("when available").

Here I discuss a winning way to do this. Not streaming "live", more of a On Demand method. Off-hours bandwidth utilization. Then consumer has DVR functionality and 1080i/p is less impact. As I stated in that post - the problem is content jail.

Although, I find it interesting that many claim this will never happen due to distribution companies owning their content and not wanting to break their monopoly (er, I mean model) yet lots of them... well... did do something different with Hulu. :confused:

#115 OFFLINE   tulanejosh

tulanejosh

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 426 posts
Joined: May 23, 2008

Posted 11 January 2013 - 11:02 AM

Hulu (Plus) fails to reach critical mass in features. That doesn't automatically mean the concept is rejected by consumers.

Just a quick check of their capabilities (their web site is strangely devoid of information) shows a few killers: 1) only streaming [supported on TiVo but it sounds like you can't use DVR functionality with their content], 2) no CBS network, 3) max 720p ("when available").

Here I discuss a winning way to do this. Not streaming "live", more of a On Demand method. Off-hours bandwidth utilization. Then consumer has DVR functionality and 1080i/p is less impact. As I stated in that post - the problem is content jail.

Although, I find it interesting that many claim this will never happen due to distribution companies owning their content and not wanting to break their monopoly (er, I mean model) yet lots of them... well... did do something different with Hulu. :confused:


Sure. they tried. Couldn't make enough money to make them abandon the existing model. Ther'es no overwhelming need or demand for this, and it's not proving to be all that profitable. Businesses need both of those things to shift paradigms. All you have now is a small number or people kavetching yet still paying for the current model.

#116 OFFLINE   tulanejosh

tulanejosh

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 426 posts
Joined: May 23, 2008

Posted 11 January 2013 - 11:04 AM

I also find it interesting that you point to the internet as the pipe. I find a great potential for hypocrasy there. On one hand - you want to pay for only what you consume when it comes to video distribution, but how many Internet video a la carte advocates would apply that same pricing model to their data consumption?

And Sirius XM is extremely successful. It's got over 20MM subscribers, which is comparable to Netflix. it's also more profitable, while delivering slightly less revenue. I bring up Netflix because it's the largest most prominent player in the cord cutting a la carte on demand movement. You've shown no data to support your assertion that broadcast is dying.

Your model is far too complicated, and requires too much planning and pre-work to watch television. It might work for you, but it's not going to work the the legions of average people that just want to watch Jay Leno for 30 minutes before falling asleep. Or what about when i just want something on in the background - call it the news - that i don't have to pay close attention to.

And it certainly won't work for Sports, which are DVR proof and have to be watched live.

Edited by tulanejosh, 11 January 2013 - 11:16 AM.


#117 OFFLINE   Tubaman-Z

Tubaman-Z

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 509 posts
Joined: Jul 30, 2007

Posted 11 January 2013 - 11:56 AM

Or what about when i just want something on in the background - call it the news - that i don't have to pay close attention to.


I typically use something called a "radio" for that. Not only is the content free, it consumes less electricity than my television/home theater.

Kevin

My top 5 wishlist: 1) Free MRV HR to HR 2) Fix Channels I Receive so that it is accurate 3) > 50 SeriesLink 4) Usage of both internal and external drives concurrently 5) Support for other video providers as DoD (i.e. Hulu, CBS)   

DirecTV HR21-200, 2008 (DirecTV anniversary gift)
DirecTV HR20-100 (2TB eSATA), 2007
DirecTV since 1995

<><


#118 OFFLINE   Tubaman-Z

Tubaman-Z

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 509 posts
Joined: Jul 30, 2007

Posted 11 January 2013 - 12:03 PM

Here I discuss a winning way to do this. Not streaming "live", more of a On Demand method. Off-hours bandwidth utilization. Then consumer has DVR functionality and 1080i/p is less impact.


Check out http://www.playlater.tv/

Kevin

My top 5 wishlist: 1) Free MRV HR to HR 2) Fix Channels I Receive so that it is accurate 3) > 50 SeriesLink 4) Usage of both internal and external drives concurrently 5) Support for other video providers as DoD (i.e. Hulu, CBS)   

DirecTV HR21-200, 2008 (DirecTV anniversary gift)
DirecTV HR20-100 (2TB eSATA), 2007
DirecTV since 1995

<><


#119 OFFLINE   tulanejosh

tulanejosh

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 426 posts
Joined: May 23, 2008

Posted 11 January 2013 - 01:24 PM

I typically use something called a "radio" for that. Not only is the content free, it consumes less electricity than my television/home theater.


That's cool, but what if i don't want to do it that way? What if i prefer.... Headline News or TNT? You forcing your preferences on me is as ridiculous as me telling you that you need to watch CNN instead of listening to the radio. Care to decide what I'm having for dinner tonight as well?

And BTW - according to unixguru, broadcast is dead, so you might want to find a podcast or something.

#120 OFFLINE   FLWingNut

FLWingNut

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 422 posts
Joined: Nov 19, 2005

Posted 11 January 2013 - 01:44 PM

And it certainly won't work for Sports, which are DVR proof and have to be watched live.


Not true. Sports are neither DVR proof nor do they have to be watched live. Many of us watch on delay, recording it and starting to watch an hour or more into it to avoid yakking taking head pregame crap and commercials and halftime/intermissions. I watch almost all the sports I really care about that way.




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