[P Smith]

From recent FCC filing:

Nevertheless, a number of satellites in the fleets of EchoStar and DISH are potentially
available for a move to 148° W.L., but those plans can only be tentative at this time pending the
launch of the EchoStar 16 satellite (currently scheduled for August 2012). Successfully placing
EchoStar 16 into operation, coupled with the commencement of operations of QuetzSat-1,
another newly launched satellite to which EchoStar has rights, should provide DISH and
EchoStar with the necessary flexibility and resources to rationalize and maximize deployment of
their satellite fleets. Specifically, successful deployment of EchoStar 16 at 61.5° W.L. will free
up the EchoStar 3, EchoStar 12 and EchoStar 15 satellites for potential redeployment.
Moreover, the 77° W.L. nominal orbital location is now populated by three satellites - EchoStar
1, EchoStar 6 and EchoStar 8. Adjustments to DISH's and EchoStar's fleets following EchoStar
16's launch may free up EchoStar 8 to move to 148° W.L,. as originally planned, or alternatively
any of the above-mentioned satellites may become available for a move to that location.

 

[James Long]

It is relatively important for DISH not to lose that slot, but until they launch a satellite designed for 148 the best they could do there would probably be some token station keeping service. Any new satellite would need to serve Alaska and Hawaii (unless the FCC grants yet another waiver, and the last one seemed to be presented as the last waiver possible).

It would be nice to have a far western option similar to the Eastern Arc. A lot can be done on a single satellite with today's technology. But one has to have the satellite in the slot and not lose the license to operate it.

 

[phrelin]

From an 8-K filed with the SEC today:

On May 31, 2012, the International Bureau of the Federal Communications Commission (the "FCC") announced the termination of our license for use of the 148 degree orbital location. We are currently evaluating whether to challenge this termination. As previously disclosed under the caption "FCC Authorizations" in our public filings, including within Note 7 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011 and Item 1 of Part I of our subsequent quarterly report on Form 10-Q, we did not have a satellite positioned at the 148 degree orbital location after the retirement of EchoStar V in August 2009. As also previously disclosed in our public filings, our license for use of the 148 degree orbital location has a $68 million carrying value, which we will be required to write off in the second quarter 2012 due to the termination of this license by the FCC.

 

[Aransay]

sad eht ethey are til no laying with quetzta 1 emxican sateleie an dno giving it to us and elve us with POR SATELITES AND EUIPMENT

 

[garys]

?????

 

[P Smith]

His is Mexico guy (has some medical thing to type correctly) - he is more concern about new Quezsat for dish in Mexico, then the 148W slot.

 

[kenglish]

Didn't Echostar also have a license for 157 W at one time? Whatever happened to that one?

 

[James Long]

Didn't Echostar also have a license for 157 W at one time? Whatever happened to that one?

In July of 2004, DISH won at auction the remaining transponders at 157. (Rainbow DBS won the transponders at 166 and 175.) In December of 2005 the FCC nullified that auction and refunded the payments.
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-213A1.pdf

DISH held license to three transponders at 157 as part of their authorization at 148. I believe they were surrendered for failure to maintain a satellite at 157.

DISH had been the only DBS company not to lose their western assignments. Before there was a DISH eastern arc and western arc, the FCC assigned licenses in pairs with transponders on eastern satellite locations (101, 110, 119 and 61.5) and an equal number of transponders on western satellite locations (148, 157, 166, 175). Most of the companies built their eastern satellites ... DirecTV primarily at 101, DISH primarily at 119, Dominion at 61.5 (on a DISH satellite) and Rainbow at 61.5 ... and let their western licenses go away.

DISH built eight of their original 11 western licenses at 148 (buying the other 24 transponders at 148 at auction in 1996). Three of their original 11 transponders were assigned to 157. (The 28 transponders DISH uses at 110 were also part of an auction in 1996. The auction was won by MCI and DISH bought the licenses from them.)

The international use of satellites, DISH leasing Canadian locations at 119 and 72.7 and most of a Mexican location at 77 with DirecTV previously leasing the Canadian location at 72.5, have changed the game some with eastern and western meaning different things than when the FCC first started handing out licenses. The addition of non DBS licensed satellites (DISH Ku at 105, 121, 118 and 87 for example) have also changed the nature of DBS.

I'd like to see DISH reopen 148 and put real services there for Alaska and Hawaii. If you look at the current DISH eastern arc you will see all national HD and RSNs in HD on one satellite --- 72.7. 77 and 61.5 are basically locals only. Turning 148 into an AK/HI single orbital location satellite would make it easier for people in AK/HI to subscribe to the entire DISH satellite service.

And with additional expense and engineering work, pacific US islands could also be covered by this service. The true western slots hold a lot of potential.

 

[scooper]

The issue is - would developing the "true" western arc (148,157,166 and 175) really pay off ? The population density isn't really there unless you force AK and HI subs to use that (and possibly the West Coast as well). At $250-$500 million per bird / launch - that is definately a long term ROI.

 

[James Long]

The issue is - would developing the "true" western arc (148,157,166 and 175) really pay off ? The population density isn't really there unless you force AK and HI subs to use that (and possibly the West Coast as well). At $250-$500 million per bird / launch - that is definately a long term ROI.

No one company would need all four slots ... so we're talking one satellite.

There is a trade off in the design ... would the AK/HI/Pacific sunscribers (and potential new subscribers) be enough to support the location or would west coast states also be needed (requiring spot beams on some transponders to provide their locals)?

Forcing people to use the new location would be encouraging people to use the new location. Perhaps load it with west coast feeds instead of all east coast? I wish there were more of an Eastern vs Western arc choice (location of HD locals usually decides the arc) ... providing a better Western vs far Western arc choice may help add customers - especially if the other companies are not doing it.

The key, of course, is maintaining the authorization for the slot. It doesn't matter if DISH has the $250 million for a satellite or not if there is no authorization to launch it and use it.

 

[kenglish]

Would they be able to license those sat locations for any type of International DBS service, or would they have to be only for the U.S.?
They might actually be able to do some sort of split spot-beam, and feed some of the Pacific Rim areas, as well as Hawaii and the U.S. Pacific territories.
Adding some International capacity, via standard Ku and C (not just DBS channels) to the spacecraft might make it profitable.