Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by mavs-fan, Jul 13, 2012.
Then you lose a ton of ratings. A big chunk still has SD only TVs or SD only service.
I think the main deal for me is that DTV SD is terrible. I was waiting since last year for this channel and they bring it out in their crappy SD. We have one TV it's a 50" panny and channels like this look terrible, they give me headaches and I can't watch them. My kids will only watch them for a short time so I wonder if they have the same issue? Adding this in SD was like a slap in the face. I have been with DTV since the mid 90's and this last year has not been good. The companies that will win out in this day will be the ones who will be moving forward with technology, not backwards. New SD channels are backwards IMO. Very disappointed.
When DirecTV first started up, SD programming didn't look bad. Over the years, DTV has over-compressed the signal to the point where it looks fuzzy even to a three year old. It got to the point where I would avoid any SD programming on DirecTV unless it was something that I absolutely wanted to watch.
I compare SD channels on DirecTV to watching a tape on an old VCR.
True but a big chunk of those SDTVs are hooked up to some sort of receiver that could downrez the HD signal so it can be viewed.
If DirecTV does indeed have bandwidth problems preventing it from adding more HD channels, maybe replacing SD-only receivers with down-rezing HD receivers and eliminating SD duplicate channels is a good idea. I'll bet that many of the of the SD-only receivers are obsolete and due for replacement anyway. If that were done then maybe DTV could use the extra bandwidth to add more HD. Gotta be cheaper than launching a new satellite.
Not enough to make it business wise yet.
Then you wouldn't be very smart in business since half the country wouldn't see your programming and even those with HD normally have a few SD televisions in the house, too.
Leaving a ton of money on the table. :nono2:
I'd be interested in knowing what percentage of DirecTV's customers still have SD sets, especially considering that they tend to cater to a more affluent customer base. Do installers even put in SD receivers any more? You can't even buy a SD TV any more. I know I've replaced all of my SD TVs with HD. The 720p sets are not very expensive and are fine for a kid's room...
People's eyes deceive them. SD channels are meant to be viewed on SD televisions. Watch SD picture on a SD television and they look fine. Watch a SD channel on a HD television, especially a large one, and they don't look good. They were never intended to look good on a HD television.
Has nothing to do with what I posted, which was in response to the idea that a channel sell only HD and not SD to satellite and cable.
You guys view this stuff through the lens of being new or early adopters. Yes, DTV still installs SD receivers for new customers but not much, something like 15% from what I have heard. There are still many people in this country where $50 per month is what they can handle so when you add HD and box fees, HD is out of the question. Let's not assume the good lives we have translates to everyone else. When you read earnings calls about things like Subscriber Acquisition Costs, the hardware is included in there. I'm sure DTV could force all new customers into HD today but those SAC numbers would go up because HD boxes are more expensive than SD. Eventually they will do this, but at a time of their choosing.
From the industry reports I have seen, most tv providers are about 50% HD and 50% SD in terms of their customer base (this was through end of 2011). However, that only means a customer is receiving HD service but could also have SD televisions in the home. Friends I have at DTV, Dish and Comcast all say the majority of the boxes out there are still hooked up to SD televisions but the gap is closing. Almost impossible to buy a SD television anymore and as those break and the costs for HD come down, people switch. But, there are many SD televisions alive and well.
Let's not forget that HD televisions were still $2000+ in 2008, that was only 4 years ago. SD televisions dominate the American landscape.
Everytime I read someone here complain about SD launches or why everything isn't HD it reminds me how little people truly understand the 115 million television households in this country. I don't mean that as an attack, I'm just stating it that most people here (and you guys are educated) have no idea what is truly out there. Ask a few installers here how many SD televisions they still see out there. The number is huge, especially for lower income level folks.
DTV is already starting to replace the older SD boxes as announced here a few weeks ago, but the cost of replacing all SD boxes would be in the mulitple billions of dollars. Easily.
Let's do the numbers. 20 million customers assuming each customer has 3 receivers (or let's be conservative and say 2.5). That's 50 million receivers.
Let's assume 20 million are HD and 30 million are SD. 30 million SD receivers that you would need to exchange, some DVRs some not. Some would require an installer and a new dish, SWM, etc.
Even if you assumed only $50 per box cost to trade out, that would be $1.5 billion. It is, of course, higher than $50 because of the installation, HD DVRs cost a ton more than $50, etc. At $100 the cost is $3 billion. At $150 it is $4.5 billion.
You're talking insane money.
But what does it cost to purchase and launch a new satellite? I'm guessing that it's over a billion dollars, at the minimum. If replacing SD receivers now can delay the launch of a satellite by a few years it might be a viable idea. Most of these SD receivers are outdated and will have to be replaced in the future anyway.
I do see your point. It's insane money either way.
The majority of customers still have SD receivers active on their accounts. A significant portion of DIRECTV customer's are still SD only. SD receivers are still installed en mass today.
Actually doesn't cost a billion. The satellites have to launch anyway because they don't have an infinite life due to fuel and such. So new satellites are going to be launched because the lifespan of some of DTV's early satellites will be winding down. Consider that a sunk cost. I suspect the newer satellites may only support HD but who knows. Probably safe to assume DTV will support SD for a number of years due to the number of SD receivers that are still out there. I don't know if that is 5 years, 7 years, 10 years.
Costs: About $450 million per including launch and insurance. See snipped below. As a result, the numbers are pretty easy, don't exchange those SD receivers because the numbers aren't there. Let customers upgrade on their own and pay the freight.
DirecTV has the equivalent of four satellites under construction that will cost a total of $1.729 billion including launch and insurance, plus $74 million paid already in 2011, the company said in its SEC filing. Future payments will total $83 million in 2011, $343 million in 2012, $334 million in 2013, $145 million in 2014, $116 million in 2015 and $708 million in subsequent years.
Added to the fees DirecTV is paying the programmers, kind of explains why our bills are so high...
Yes MPEG2 SD receivers should have started to been phased out after the launch of D10.
D* couldn't take an HD feed, downrez it to MPEG2 SD and put it up on 101 for their SD customers while at the same time deliver it in HD to their HD customers? Isn't this happening now with some SD feeds (ESPN and FSN)? I noticed some of them are letter boxed.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that HD channels could be displayed on SDTVs with a receiver, I do it now on a couple of my TVs.
I guess we still have a ways to go before HD is the standard.
Except I can take a DVD in a non-uprezing player on a 50" plasma and it will look okay. Not HD obviously, but not terrible. DTV takes SD programming and actually ruins it. Is it the HD recievers? I don't know how SD boxes look now I haven't had one in at least 10 years.
I posted the source elsewhere, but according to an FCC filing in May, half of the customers have HD, and 60% of new customers. There are certainly a lot of customers with HD service and some SD boxes.
Wasn't SoapNet supposed to be replaced by Disney Jr? I see today that SoapNet is still on channel 262.