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

ESPN prez confident that Dish-Disney deal will renew before Sept. 30 expiration

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by FTA Michael, Aug 22, 2013.

  1. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,626
    391
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    You are ignoring, though, that cable TV and early satellite TV did in fact start out as a pick-your-channel business... people picked channels they wanted and ignored others, only paying for the ones they wanted... but increasingly as more channels were offered, people had the choice of a discounted bundle vs individual channels... and more people chose the bundles than the individual channels. Couple that with the advent of DBS and people chose the convenience of a smaller DBS dish vs the convenience of pay-per-channel on C-band where you had a bigger dish to contend with.

    Bottom line is, the system we have now mostly evolved in this direction because that's what people wanted the business to deliver to them.

    In businesses where choice is king, things evolve differently... people don't want a bundle of groceries that are picked by someone else... we like to pick our own groceries... but people wanted bundles and tiers of channels, so that's where we are now.

    Unless and until something changes about consumer habits, the majority of consumers seem to want the system in place now... so that's why we stay in this model.
     
  2. sregener

    sregener Godfather

    630
    27
    Apr 17, 2012
    I think you are oversimplifying the choice consumers had to make. When I bought a DBS system in 1995, I did so for a couple of reasons. First, I wanted NFL Sunday Ticket. Second, my HOA would not permit me to erect a satellite dish above the fence line of my property, and a BUD would not have fit in my 10'x8' back yard. My choices were DBS or cable. A la carte was not an option.

    Consumers have to compromise to get what they want. And as the media companies have consolidated, they have made more and more demands of "if you want channel x, you must also include channels y,z, and f." In some cases, they have tied the ability to carry a broadcast station to a dozen unpopular cable channels. While consumers would ultimately want the popular channel, I question whether they really want to have no choice about getting the unpopular ones. However, it is unlikely that the price for the popular channels would stay as low as it is if this kind of tying were prohibited by consumer demand. So the choice may be: "You can get 12 channels for $60 or 250 channels for $60. Which do you prefer?" Assuming the 12 are in the 250, it's pretty obvious which one consumers would prefer. Which is probably pretty close to what the reality of a la carte would be.
     
  3. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,626
    391
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    I probably did oversimplify a bit... but I think your bottom line captures the long-term settling point... Eventually we would see a bill of about the same amount for far less channels because the surviving channels would ask for more and more, and the rest of the channels wouldn't find enough of an audience to support themselves.
     

Share This Page