DBSTalk Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
New Member
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
i talked with Dish tonight and the CSR informed me that Dish will be merging with DirectTv by the end of the year.

how true is that?

i know that the FCC had problems with Dish buying DirectTv so can a merger be an alternative?

Rotty
 

·
Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
1,117 Posts
It seems Dish Network is counting their chickens before they are hatched. I really support this merger, under STRICT guidelines of course, but it seems they think the FCC and DOJ have already given them the go-ahead.
 

·
New Member
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
i don't support the merger. this is eliminating competition. hence, you'll get lower quality from the survivor.

here's an example:

customer: you know cable is only $30/month. you're charging me $45 for the same channels.

csr: so.

customer: ahhhh...ok thanks.
 

·
Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
2,026 Posts
Wal Mart has been able to reduce operating costs and negotiate lower and lower prices from suppliers because of their purchasing volume. Wal Mart has been "eliminating competition" for years. Economists even refer to the "Wal Mart effect". By merging E* and D* the same savings are expected. Also, E* and D* won't be duplicating programming delivery.

That's important for making full local coverage workable. Folks have posted scenarios where each provider could provide full locals using current and planned assets. The glaring hole in those arguments is that while it might be technically possible, it causes the financial breakeven point to be much higher on the list of local cities served. That is, a combined entity will have a shorter list of small cities that are cash losers. That list is much longer with two DBS providers fighting for too few customers.

Customer: You know the local drug store charges $5 for this bottle of shampoo, but Wal Mart only charges $2.75.
 

·
Icon
Joined
·
720 Posts
Bad comparison. Wall Mart may have good purchasing power, but if they didn't have to compete with Target, Meijer, Kmart... they would just pocke the profits and not return the savings. Competition or government regulation are the only motivations to lower prices and improve service. There are no exceptions to this
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,498 Posts
While Im undecided on the merger, remember, if the merger goes through, Charlie cant raise prices too much becasue of digital cable, and in most case DBS is cheaper then digital cable and thats how Charlie wants too keep it to keep and add subscribers
 

·
Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
2,026 Posts
Originally posted by jeffwtux
Bad comparison. Wall Mart may have good purchasing power, but if they didn't have to compete with Target, Meijer, Kmart... they would just pocke the profits and not return the savings. Competition or government regulation are the only motivations to lower prices and improve service. There are no exceptions to this
I don't think it's a bad comparison at all. The Mart is the 300 lb guerilla in the retail market, but competes with smaller outfits such as Target and the bankrupt K-Mart. The combined Echostar/DirecTV would be the new 300 lb guerilla on the subscription TV block, but would continue to compete with the smaller AT&T cable and the nearly bankrupt Comcast, etc. Actually, the similarities make it an excellent case study in horizontal integration.
 

·
Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
1,637 Posts
customer: you know cable is only $30/month. you're charging me $45 for the same channels.
This quote is backwards, cable charges $45 for the same channels DBS charges $30 for and the PQ is generally far inferior, even with Dish's overcompression. When I switch from watching cable (rarely) to Dish, my eyes heave a sigh of relief, the picture is so much better for so much less money.

I'm all for the merger, go Charlie!!! I want more HD and less compression and the only way we will get it is with the merger. (Keeping my fingers crossed).
 

·
Legend
Joined
·
181 Posts
Originally posted by lee635


I don't think it's a bad comparison at all. The Mart is the 300 lb guerilla in the retail market, but competes with smaller outfits such as Target and the bankrupt K-Mart. The combined Echostar/DirecTV would be the new 300 lb guerilla on the subscription TV block, but would continue to compete with the smaller AT&T cable and the nearly bankrupt Comcast, etc. Actually, the similarities make it an excellent case study in horizontal integration.
Walmart just doesnt compete with Target and Kmart. They compete against grocery stories, CVS, BJ's, electronic stores, clothing stores, local regional chain stores. I can live my life without going to a national Mart store and can pick up all the products from a variety of places. And even if KMart goes under, its not to say a new competitor can't start to compete in the Mart market.

Its not that easy with DBS.

Watching live TV, I have only few choices.

The merged Echostar/Directv will only have 2 competitors:
1) Cable
2) Broadcasters

In some areas, cable is not available. Other areas, cable just cant compete in numbers because low population.

Already, Charlie is attempting to weaken the broadcast industry. First by going after the non network stations that request mustcarry. Instead of putting all local channels together and providing the necessary free equipment, they are separating local channels to different satellite slots. This affects the local station that is being put on the side satellite. How many times has Dish tried to get mustcarry overturn? How long now is the wait to get the "free" second dish?

How do I benefit from a merger, if Dish is attempting to cut down my 15 channel local Philly package, down to 7 via overturning mustcarry? If Dish gets away with it, Comcast will try also.

WGTW 48 could go under even when they did everything right to serve the public interest if both Comcast and Dish/Directv told them we dont have to carry you, we wont. Local Spanish and ethnic audiences might see WYBE 35 and WUVP 65 go off the air. People in Berks/Lehigh counties would lose their only source of news forced off the air. Same with Jersey shore.

Then, EchoStar Asks U.S. Supreme Court To Protect Rights of All Americans to Choose Their Network Channels . Basically this an attempt to weaken the broadcast network affiliates. The local network stations based in Philly that are owned by the networks would find this preposterous also. They want their exclusivity so they can charge the high ad rates to local advertisers, so viewers will see their ads. In return, we get about 5 competing local newscasts, and free Television (about 9 channels) to most of the market.

So Dish wants to cause stir with Viacom, GE, Disney and FOX, Univision, Tribune, Hearst, Scripps which own most of the AT 100 channels too? The remaining we have Rainbow(Cablevision backed), Comcast backed channels, Time Warner backed channels, and these are companies with interest in cable tv.

To be truthful, I am not sure about the merger. But I am very skeptical about Dish sometimes. Sometimes they come up with some crazy ideas.

I think if Dish wants the merger, they should accept mustcarry and stop pursuing against it. They'll get lot more support IMO. If they carry all locals and plan like how Directv does (one small dish), they'll get NAB support. If they offer more national channels with the freeing of CONUS space and offer at a reasonable price plus carry all the national RSNs like YES and FSW2 (before claiming we need Comcast SportsNet), they can win support from consumers also.
 

·
Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
1,849 Posts
Originally posted by DarrellP

This quote is backwards, cable charges $45 for the same channels DBS charges $30 for and the PQ is generally far inferior, even with Dish's overcompression. When I switch from watching cable (rarely) to Dish, my eyes heave a sigh of relief, the picture is so much better for so much less money.

I'm all for the merger, go Charlie!!! I want more HD and less compression and the only way we will get it is with the merger. (Keeping my fingers crossed).
The only reason DBS charges $30 is because the two companies are in fierce competition. Without the competition, we'll end up with the same scenario that digital cable provides. No competition with high prices. Let's face it, E* wants everyone to think that the competition is between DBS and cable to get the merger approved. The actual competition is between the two DBS companies.

E* has promised to carry all 210 DMAs. All I can say is yeah, right. In the past six months, D* has added six DMAs and promised four more. E* has added one and not promised any more. Is that the rate they will roll out locals after the merger?

There are so many complex issues with this merger. Those of us with Directv equipment are a little nervous. E* has promised that all equipment will be changed out free of charge. I'm not so sure that I want to give my Ultimatetv receivers away for something that may or may not work.

I also don't want a second dish on my roof to pick up all my locals. I currently receive all my locals with my standard dual LNB 18" dish.

There isn't a lot for D* subs to be excited about with this merger. We currently receive great service with totally reliable equipment. How will E* improve upon that for us?
 

·
Godfather
Joined
·
360 Posts
E* merging with DirecTV is mainly to have joint access to the satelites. It would cost E* billions to put up 40 more satelites or so. But it would only cost like 1 billion if that to merge. They look at it as though that are wasting satelite space as two separate companies. They are both using all of there satelites to send out that same channels. If it was one big company they would be able to you half the number of satelilites to send out the channels. and we would get more channels like the complete HBO set with Zone and Comedy both east and west. We would have every channel available. And it would only be a matter of months before they have all 210 DMA's available. They already have the ones that DirecTV has and then they will have theres. They would also be able to provide broadband over the satelite all over the nation. This is good for those who dont have access to broadband or even regular cable TV. I supportthe merger 100% and dont see why anyone would be against it.
 

·
Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
1,849 Posts
E* is mainly merging with D* to have access to thier customers and their money. It is a money decision, not a goodness-of-their-heart-to-provide-better-service decision.

Monopolistic business practices are never in the customer's best interest. No competition=status quo with no improvement.
 

·
Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
1,530 Posts
Originally posted by AJ2086
And it would only be a matter of months before they have all 210 DMA's available.
Many people have speculated about the benefits of a merged company, but speculation is all that it is. Charlie has claimed that all 210 DMA's will be served, but not in the few months you mention - in 3 YEARS. That's his promise. Has he ever not delivered on such a claim? As you may have heard, Charlie is attempting to avoid carrying all stations in those markets, too.

The merger is full of promises, but I believe it's a mistake to approve it when no other satellite providers exist. If three or more existed, a merger of two might be acceptable. When the ONLY two players want to merge, the result will be less innovation and less incentive to keep prices from rising.

I no of no businessperson who wouldn't want the competition to go away so he/she could have pricing power. This merger is no exception.

As you may have guessed, I don't support the merger... :)
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top