Pay TV is changing rapidly

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by Bedford11, Nov 22, 2016.

  1. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    11,035
    1,656
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Politicians championing reduction in regulations are not doing it to benefit consumers, but to benefit the industry. Obviously there are and always will be regulations that are outdated, were written incorrectly or with unnecessary complexity, or were bought and paid for by industry lobbyists to protect the profits they feel they're entitled to. Those should go, but it is wishful thinking to believe that politicians will correctly identify all of those and leave regulations that exist to benefit consumers in place.

    Regulations are necessary to correct market failures, both for the public good and for the benefit of individual consumers. Like food safety laws so you don't have to check review sites to see if people get sick eating the meat from your local grocery store or restaurant. They also fix 'tragedies of the commons': for instance, it is free to dump waste in the river behind your factory, so clean water regulations were required to make doing that cost more than disposing of it properly. They're also necessary in an industry that has high barriers to entry and limited resources, like DTH satellite broadcasting. Both because you don't want someone else launching a satellite in the same location and frequency as Directv and broadcasting at higher power to drown them out, and because in exchange for allowing them to use scarce resources like satellite frequencies they can be required to serve as many customers as possible by i.e. offering them their local stations.

    But what regulations should not try to do, and what a lot of "deregulate everything!" people will point to as examples for why 'all regulation is bad', is regulations that try to interfere with contract law where there is no market failure. Getting involved in the way Bedford11 seems to want would be exactly that - the government would have to create new regulations preventing networks from refusing to sell streaming rights to the local stations, and preventing the NFL from refusing to allow streaming of their games on those local stations, just so he can realize his dream of streaming completely replacing traditional broadcast TV.

    If the networks were forced to sell those rights, after they threw a hissy fit and fought it in court for years, they'd offer it at a very high price. As would the NFL. And suddenly those cheap streaming packages would be even more expensive than the cable and satellite subscriptions they replaced! Now they may and probably will choose (i.e. their choice, not forced on them by the government) to sell them in some fashion - either like CBS as a standalone streaming package of their network's programming (minus the NFL) or like the others make it available on their O&O stations for now, see how that goes, and later when they have a better idea as to their value sell the rights to their local affiliates who could then sell them to Directv, Sling and other streaming providers. But since the local stations will have to pay the networks more to get those rights, they'll charge more to providers for them. So your bill keeps going up...
     
  2. AZ.

    AZ. Legend

    339
    53
    Mar 27, 2011
    Very well stated......Just follow the money.......For those who live under rocks.....Google "K" street....and see how everything even our democracy is up for sale!
     
  3. Bedford11

    Bedford11 Member

    251
    7
    Aug 21, 2015
    You guys have a front row seat. I used to think like you. I know where you are coming from. Pay TV will change more rapidly with less regulation. AT&T is all for it. Cut the regs. and red tape already. Funny how all the money has congregated in Washington D.C., Three of the richest counties in America surround D.C. where there is little to no manufacturing, just paper shuffeling and power grabbing has made it that way. Out in the rest of the country where products and actual services, like the telcom and other industries actually produce something.

    It’s not that money controls Washington. Washington controls the money. They have an industrial logic to this business model just like any other business model. And that is to extract power from the rest of the country in money into centralized location which is Washington.
    Watch and learn in 2017 and beyond. Going to be fun watching the Comm. and tech sectors boom.

    It Is Time To Unshackle The Communications Sector

    It's Not That Money Controls Washington. Washington Controls the Money

    Just look at this red tape nightmare, has been years and years trying to cut thru to get a simple task done.

    DISH certification brings La Plata County closer to Denver TV

    Is Denver TV coming to Durango?

    FCC Gives Officials More Time to Respond to Broadcaster Petitions | Broadcasting & Cable

    Commissioners pursuing Clarksburg channels on satellite
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2016
  4. lparsons21

    lparsons21 Hall Of Fame

    5,869
    730
    Mar 4, 2006
    Herrin, IL
    Over time the market might correct for the consumer, but pull those regulations and the prices will most likely rise more than they do currently. And if they do, the decline of pay tv subscriptions will increase which should push the prices back down. Or at least that is the theory the totally free market types want us to believe.

    Those companies don't pay all that money for all those lobbyists to help us the consumer. Of course if you still believe in the tooth fairy, you could believe that i suppose.
     
  5. Bedford11

    Bedford11 Member

    251
    7
    Aug 21, 2015
    Too much competition (a very good thing for the consumer) is coming into the market, a few short years ago we never would have thought that a phone co., internet co., online marketing co would be providing TV services, just a few short years ago you just had what, maybe 4 major providers and soaring prices, now you see lower prices coming due to good ol competition. Be very thankful that technology (not regulation) has gotten us here. I am all for smart regs from the FCC.
     
  6. AZ.

    AZ. Legend

    339
    53
    Mar 27, 2011
    Ok....I followed the links...a few are kinda out there and another is an opinion piece!
    This is about ideology and not improving it......Just complaints.....The magic (phoney) Free Market....
    This is about political discourse not problem solving....
    We saw deregulation and it has messed up the electrical grid, and old Judge Green breaking up ATT many decades ago.....Never lowered one thing....Just made a bill for local and long distance separate...
    Why people think any company gives a hoot about us, its all about proffits they make off us.....

    We all see where this conversation is going......Im outa here!
     
  7. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    11,035
    1,656
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Wow, you've really swallowed the spiel you're being fed hook, line and sinker, haven't you? You remind me of all the democrats who thought Obama's election was going to change the world. Now it is conservatives who see a revolution coming. Reality is going to hit them in the face, just like it hit the liberals in the face when they realized that control of the white house and congress does NOT give you control of Washington. The people with the money are still in charge, as they have always been.
     
    KyL416 and AZ. like this.
  8. Bedford11

    Bedford11 Member

    251
    7
    Aug 21, 2015
    Pay TV is changing, take a look at few pages here

    Tag: streaming | TVNewsCheck.com

    For today’s social and video networks, the human network — you and me — is changing the entire business models of publishers, TV and radio broadcasters and even cable TV companies as well as content providers in entertainment, news and sports. The real question, then, is not whether broadcasters, advertisers and content providers will be disrupted by the power of us and what we produce and distribute — but how quickly?

    How Platforms Will Disrupt the Future of Media and Entertainment - Knowledge@Wharton
     
  9. Bedford11

    Bedford11 Member

    251
    7
    Aug 21, 2015
    I used to pay .56 cents a minute for long distance telephone service. Once competition entered, Now I pay .01 cent a minute.

    Same will happen with pay TV.
     
  10. inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    25,148
    1,593
    Nov 13, 2006
    Wow. That's such a different world. That fact that you are trying to compare those two is frightening. Tv has never had a regulation like the old pots phone lines that are half the reason they cost so much. Pay tv will increase in price per minute available, it'll never fall. Not over the long haul. To suggest otherwise is to ignore how it all operates in the first place. And I don't just mean the old ways. I mean especially streaming.
     
    KyL416 likes this.
  11. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Gold Club DBSTalk Club

    51,841
    2,509
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Big companies do not support ideas because they are good for consumers. Big companies support ideas because they are good for big companies.

    Less regulation will not make sure ATTWS is giving fair access to other streaming providers over their network. Less regulation will not require new entrants to be given a fair chance to compete.

    If an idea that helps a big company also happens to help a consumer that is great ... but never forget that the priority of any viable commercial company is to make money for themselves. And that means supporting ideas that help the company.
     
  12. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Gold Club DBSTalk Club

    51,841
    2,509
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    A reminder ... this is not a place for political discourse. Stay out of the weeds of Republican vs Democrat, etc.
     
  13. AZ.

    AZ. Legend

    339
    53
    Mar 27, 2011
    The whole thing kinda reminds me of the scam called Net Neutrality....Sounds so good to the average Joe....But its just a word smiths way of playing and pulling the wool over the public's eye!
     
  14. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    11,035
    1,656
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Are you really so dense you don't see the difference? The bill you pay the cable or satellite company isn't for the delivery, it is for the content. Directv doesn't have a lot of cost to shed by dumping its satellites - in another post a while back I made a rough calculation that it probably costs them around a quarter a month per subscriber to maintain and upgrade their satellite fleet. Even if delivery via streaming was totally free it wouldn't change your bill, unless you think they would pass that quarter in savings along to you, because the vast majority of their cost is paying content providers.

    Competition isn't going to make sports rights cost less, unless you are willing to substitute MLS soccer for the NFL and bowling for college football. It isn't going to make prime time programming cost less, unless you are willing to substitute Hee Haw reruns for Big Bang Theory. Sure, maybe you don't watch that stuff, or cable shows like Walking Dead - if so you are a perfect candidate for cord cutting and can already realize that savings. But people who do that aren't saving money because streaming is cheaper for delivery, they are saving money because they prefer or are willing to substitute inexpensive content.

    People who like football and HBO and so forth are going to have to pay a lot whether they get it delivered to a satellite dish, or a cable, via a gigabit fiber connection to their home, 5G wireless or ESP. Streaming doesn't lower content costs AT ALL, and no amount of competition imagined by someone who obviously has clue how economics even works will change that.
     
    AZ. likes this.
  15. Bedford11

    Bedford11 Member

    251
    7
    Aug 21, 2015
    Content Providers will be Feeling the pain also.
    This is truly a revolution.
    Splintering and lots of M&A all at the same time, amazing to watch.
    The cost to enter the streaming market is sooo much cheaper than satellite thus bringing in even more top flight and lower end competition

    You are going to be amazed at the content coming from the little guys, if a cat video can hold their attention, well, the sky's the limit. lol

    It’s time to change the core beliefs — or mental models — of media and entertainment companies if they want to survive,
    It is not whether broadcasters, advertisers and content providers will be disrupted by the power of us and what we produce and distribute — but how quickly?

    We, the people, are about to be direct competitors to the likes of ABC, NBC and CBS.
    Look what me and you are doing right now, we are creating our own content, we could be watching reruns of Happy Days but we choose the much more brain stimulating form of interactive media, just imagine the stimulation kids are getting thru interactive social media. Much more engaging than a non interactive cartoon.
    Hollywood wants to fight back with interactive content, we need fast internet connections for that, satellite can't deliver, fastest way there is the quick install of wireless fiber better known as Fixed wireless, here they come, Google, AT&T, Dish with their spectrum, Verizon, CoOps, cities, etc,. etc..
    Competition in Content and Delivery is good for the consumer and we know what it does for pricing.
    TV and Internet will be cheaper due to this.
    Link
    How Platforms Will Disrupt the Future of Media and Entertainment - Knowledge@Wharton


    Summarizing the pros and cons for OTT distribution, Dish Network Chairman and CEO Charlie Ergen said there is a danger that the pay-TV ecosystem could be “chopped up” into a paradigm that is “truly an à la carte experience.”

    “The barriers to entry are not great, so pretty much anybody could enter into the marketplace,” Ergen said Wednesday during Dish’s third-quarter earnings call with investment analysts and media. “So, there's a lot of technical things you've got to do and there's some capital and so forth. But there's certainly big guys, big companies that could enter the business."


    Streaming TV Will Put Pressure on Content Providers


    Many more Giants to enter the fray, end to end, from content to delevery.
    Mr. Ergen appears unconcerned—and it seems with good reason. He said that foreign carriers, cable operators and internet companies could also be interested in Dish’s spectrum. And he is clearly prepared to wait for the right buyer to emerge. A lot could happen before 2020—the earliest deadline for Dish to put its spectrum to use in a network.

    Ergen: Dish not doing M&A deal would be ‘malpractice’ in the wake of AT&T-Time Warner merger

    Ergen: Dish not doing M&A deal would be ‘malpractice’ in the wake of AT&T-Time Warner merger | FierceCable


    Dish: Ergen’s Vision Is Worth More Than the Market Thinks
     
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2016
  16. AZ.

    AZ. Legend

    339
    53
    Mar 27, 2011
    Why do you keep posting advertisements and opinion pieces?....You sources are getting to be troll like?

    Im seeing a pattern more like an agenda?
     
    slice1900 likes this.
  17. CTJon

    CTJon Godfather

    971
    117
    Feb 5, 2007
    This all reminds me of the land line telephone and data network discussion of decades ago. Other than via Satellite someone controls the last mile of wire to your house. So AT&T or ?? may own the big fiber pipes to your town but who owns the wire between that fiber and your house. They will really control the costs. The fiber providers may own the big pipe and do the contracts to the local phone/ cable/? company. It isn't going to get cheaper in total. Your TV contract may go down but then your internet bill will go up. We may have choices in the future but those will still be limited at some point by one provider.
     
    AZ. likes this.
  18. Bedford11

    Bedford11 Member

    251
    7
    Aug 21, 2015
    And to think the myriad of 5G wireless fiber providers have not arrived yet in the cities.
    Verizon says they will be there in 2017 ready to mix it up. Sprint owner just released they will be spending 50 Billion to up their game.

    AT&T going out of their footprint and competing with the local providers to gain millions of customers.

    The IOT demands wireless to be everywhere.

    Cable/AT&T/Google plus the coming 5G wireless players.

    Almost forgot about SpaceX coming with their LEO based internet service.

    There will be many TV providers to switch between,, no contract to hold you in, click your mouse and you have a new provider.

    Internet provider gets greedy?, with the options for high speed internet available just make the switch.

    Just looking at some of the pricing, Looks like a nice 50 meg. unlimited service will average about 40-50 bucks around the country once the buildout gets going/concluded.

    Competition is good.

    AT&T announces it will match Google Fiber's price and speed in Kansas City

    AT&T’s newest fiber customers to pay $40 more than Google Fiber users

    AT&T drops fiber prices to Google Fiber levels

    Japanese Telecom Co. Will Invest $50 Billion to Create 50,000 Jobs in U.S. -

    SpaceX plans worldwide satellite Internet with low latency, gigabit speed

    AT&T: Mining the MDU Market | Light Reading
     
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2016
  19. Aridon

    Aridon Mentor

    190
    25
    Mar 12, 2007
    They were expensive because there was zero competition. Then they were forced to open their lines to resellers and suddenly prices started to tumble. Then the internet became main stream and VOIP took over. I haven't paid for my home phone in 8 years and have free calls to USA and Canada. Unlimited. Thank you Google Voice via Obi.

    Similar will happen with TV and Internet. New market entrants are going to force competition in a market where there was virtually none. Many people, simply refused to use satellite for one reason or another and many simply refused to use cable on the other side. Same with internet. DSL is a joke in most of America. One real provider. In areas with many providers, prices area always less.

    As new wireless options expand over the next 10 years the Internet, how you connect and how much you pay are going to change rapidly. Same with Pay TV. New entrants are cutting packages that would cost $135 with D* to $35 or $45 and giving you 5 streams. People pay for internet regardless so it is a sunk cost.

    You know the hilarious thing. You could Stack D* with 2 other house holds and still pay more for TV than you would just getting it through Vue or Sling or NOW. That is pretty ridiculous pricing and it may take a decade for people to slowly do something about it but that era is quickly coming to an end.

    People love to talk about "free markets" and other buzz words but seem to forget that the markets we have in Pay TV / Internet space are hardly free and competition has been stifled for decades. Quite frankly, these providers have had enough Welfare and it is time for the consumer to get some love.
     
  20. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    11,035
    1,656
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    You're dreaming if you think content providers are going to accept making far less money. Streaming is cheaper now because a lot of stuff like the NFL is missing, or streaming is such a minor component (i.e. ESPN) that they are OK with making it free for now. That won't continue as streaming gains traction.

    Certain people here seem to think that people watching cat videos on Youtube means that people will happily substitute that for what they're watching on TV now. Whatever! :rolleyes:
     

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements