I don't see that as a consideration at all. And I still wouldn't call anything an actual delay. Until they give a specific date for a lunch it's all just a gestinate. Sat launches just aren't a routine thing. This is more like a carpenter building a single piece of customer furniture at a time not a plant tossing out ikea furniture.
I was wondering the same. Seems plausible that DTV or its new owner would potentially push back large non-critical acquisitions or costs until after merger/buyouts was complete. Don't know how fund transfers occur in satellite field, but would guess that all funds aren't transferred until bird becomes fully operational in orbit.
DIRECTV-14 is a powerful, high-capacity spacecraft that will use Ka-band and the new "Reverse" DBS band to expand high definition and other new consumer services. This satellite will be the sixth SS/L-built satellite in DIRECTV's fleet based on the highly reliable 1300 satellite platform. DIRECTV delivers hundreds of channels of crystal-clear digital programming to more than 31 million customers in the U.S. and Latin America with small-diameter dish antennas. This satellite is scheduled for launch in 2014 and will provide service for users across the U.S. (including Hawaii and Alaska) and Puerto Rico.
DirecTV's announcement in 2011:
Arianespace said the satellites will be launched in 2014 from a facility in Kourou, French Guiana. Space Systems Loral is building DirecTV-14, which is the first satellite to be launched under the contract, while the contract for the second satellite hasn't been awarded yet.
DirecTV's launch authority request filed with the FCC in 2012:
"DIRECTV anticipates that Space Systems/Loral will complete construction of DIRECTV 14 in the fourth quarter of 2013 and that the satellite will be launched by the end of that year or in early 2014."
Would it be sarcastic to point out that the satellite builder, owner, launcher and authorizing agency are involved in the planning?
I was wondering the same. Seems plausible that DTV or its new owner would potentially push back large non-critical acquisitions or costs until after merger/buyouts was complete. Don't know how fund transfers occur in satellite field, but would guess that all funds aren't transferred until bird becomes fully operational in orbit.
There are commitments involved. SS/L isn't going to want to sit on their costs for an additional year. They need to pay for the parts and labor put in to the satellite. Arianespace has not performed and might be willing to allow DirecTV out of the launch deal (especially if they cannot perform). But buying and launching a satellite is not done by simple agreements that can be easily cancelled.
I was wondering the same. Seems plausible that DTV or its new owner would potentially push back large non-critical acquisitions or costs until after merger/buyouts was complete. Don't know how fund transfers occur in satellite field, but would guess that all funds aren't transferred until bird becomes fully operational in orbit.
Directv isn't owned by AT&T until the merger is approved, which may take quite some time. In the meantime, Directv is going to proceed according to their plans and AT&T has zero say over that. These plans have them launching two new satellites, D14 and D15. It isn't clear why AT&T would want to stop the launch, much of the cost isn't the launch, but the construction of the satellites, and that's a sunk cost at this point.
Not to mention that Directv is more valuable with more satellite resources, as it can deliver more channels, be able to offer 4K programming, etc. AT&T clearly realizes the benefit of a wide selection of channels, as from what I understand Uverse offers a wider selection than any other provider except possibly FIOS. It wouldn't make sense that they'd eliminate Directv's ability to match or exceed Uverse's offering to save money by cancelling the launch of an already built satellite.
Despite the trolling of a certain Dish fanboy who likes to rain on Directv's parade every chance he gets, until an actual launch date is set there's not much point in talking about delays. Directv probably wanted/hoped to have D14 launched by now back when the original contract was signed, but judging from NASA's experience with the shuttle, planning a launch schedule years in advance is like predicting the weather years in advance.
Sure, but Directv's management did the math and made the decision to go ahead years ago. Being bought out (and not even for sure, as the FCC may not allow it) doesn't change that math, especially now that most of the cost has already been incurred. My understanding is that satellites similar to what Directv is launching cost around a half billion dollars to build, which would be a lot of investment to walk away from to save a "mere" $100 million.
It isn't as if they're in poor financial shape and need to save money, or that saving $100 million now by cancelling the launch (if AT&T can get the deal done before the launch happens) would pay off in the long run when Directv wouldn't be able to add all the channels that Uverse has and couldn't offer 4K. Pretty sure AT&T didn't buy them to freeze them on today's technology forever while the competition moves on, that would be a waste of most of the $50 billion they're paying as the profits Directv is making today would shrink every year as they fell behind.
If Directv's management had reason to believe AT&T might want to stop the launch to save money, they could make non-refundable payment for the launch for D14 (and D15 while they're at it) if they wanted. AT&T couldn't stop them, and I'm sure Ariane would be happy to take Directv's money now. In fact, is it possible Directv has already put some money down for the launch? I don't really know how that works, but I wouldn't be terribly surprised if a down payment is required to hold a launch slot or something like that.
If Directv's management had reason to believe AT&T might want to stop the launch to save money, they could make non-refundable payment for the launch for D14 (and D15 while they're at it) if they wanted. AT&T couldn't stop them, ...
To put it bluntly:
"Additionally, the Merger Agreement provides for customary pre-closing covenants of DIRECTV, including covenants to conduct its business in the ordinary course consistent with past practice and to refrain from taking certain actions without the Company's consent, ..."
If the payment you suggest is not part of "conduct its business in the ordinary course consistent with past practice" DirecTV would NOT be able to take such action. An inconsistent action would be a breach of DirecTV's agreement.
That being said, the normal course of business is to proceed with the launch as if there were no merger pending. If anyone is worrying about D-14 not being launched because of the AT&T / DirecTV merger please set those worries aside.
Directv isn't owned by AT&T until the merger is approved, which may take quite some time. In the meantime, Directv is going to proceed according to their plans and AT&T has zero say over that. These plans have them launching two new satellites, D14 and D15. It isn't clear why AT&T would want to stop the launch, much of the cost isn't the launch, but the construction of the satellites, and that's a sunk cost at this point.
Not to mention that Directv is more valuable with more satellite resources, as it can deliver more channels, be able to offer 4K programming, etc. AT&T clearly realizes the benefit of a wide selection of channels, as from what I understand Uverse offers a wider selection than any other provider except possibly FIOS. It wouldn't make sense that they'd eliminate Directv's ability to match or exceed Uverse's offering to save money by cancelling the launch of an already built satellite.
Despite the trolling of a certain Dish fanboy who likes to rain on Directv's parade every chance he gets, until an actual launch date is set there's not much point in talking about delays. Directv probably wanted/hoped to have D14 launched by now back when the original contract was signed, but judging from NASA's experience with the shuttle, planning a launch schedule years in advance is like predicting the weather years in advance.
That is certainly counter to the title purpose of this thread.
What shouldn't play as big a big role is engaging the apologist warp drive in an attempt to explain away business decisions or other unrevealed contributors to delays. Throwing out wild guesses about what is at stake financially or surmising that AT&T must have already infected DIRECTV isn't sound reasoning.
In the end, it usually comes down to either the satellite not being ready (SSL has a record for beating deliveries) or the launch schedule (including issues with launch failures and vehicle delivery) with a dash of shuffling that comes with someone trading for an earlier ride (I recall that DIRECTV gave up their original position in the previous launch campaign).
It is at least interesting that they were in order and now they're not. It is all part of discovering the eventual launch time and the process in general. Those who pay attention will hopefully temper their reasoning with that in mind.
It is at least interesting that they were in order and now they're not. It is all part of discovering the eventual launch time and the process in general. Those who pay attention will hopefully temper their reasoning with that in mind.
What a semantically-null and frankly, dull comment; it's almost as if you want to get the last word in, regardless of how useless that word actually is to the substance of the discussion.
There is nothing more mysterious going on here than the usual Arianespace chaos. If you look back over the history of Arianespace I don't think they have EVER launched a commercial payload on time. They are the MOST delay-prone commercial launch service, but at the moment, they are the only real option for DirecTV. The alternatives when they were contracting a launch were to wait for SeaLaunch to maybe someday getting back into business (they still have not) or rolling the dice on the Proton (who had a launch failure as recently as last month - the fifth out of the last 36 attempts).
There is nothing more mysterious going on here than the usual Arianespace chaos. If you look back over the history of Arianespace I don't think they have EVER launched a commercial payload on time. They are the MOST delay-prone commercial launch service, but at the moment, they are the only real option for DirecTV. The alternatives when they were contracting a launch were to wait for SeaLaunch to maybe someday getting back into business (they still have not) or rolling the dice on the Proton (who had a launch failure as recently as last month - the fifth out of the last 36 attempts).
Wow, how did I miss that? I thought they were still a couple of months away from resuming operations. As Harley notes, Sea Launch wasn't a viable option when they were contracting this launch.
Wow, how did I miss that? I thought they were still a couple of months away from resuming operations. As Harley notes, Sea Launch wasn't a viable option when they were contracting this launch.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
DBSTalk Forum
3.6M posts
112K members
Since 2001
A forum community dedicated to digital bit streaming enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about programming, content, and reception, home theaters, displays, models, styles, satellites, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!