Browse opendtv: This Month's Archive • Main Archive Page • Related posts • Previous by Date • Next by Date

[opendtv] Re: Ofcom's proposed spectrum auction

From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 09:37:08 -0400

At 7:13 PM -0400 6/7/08, Albert Manfredi wrote:

What did the Brits do differently, Craig, aside from making the DTTmultiplex ownership more attractive to the owners?

They DID NOT ALLOW a few conglomerates to dictate the terms of thebusiness model for their people. They encouraged competition and thencreated a playing field where a Freeview was possible.

Look at the facts. The multiplexes are owned by what, four differentcompanies? BBC, ITV, NGW, and BBC Free To View Ltd. How is that anydifferent from, say, the major US networks owning the multiplexeshere (or Sinclair, or Scripps, or some other similar company)?

First they do not own anything. They have been granted the privilegeto operate these multiplexes and chose the business model that is inuse - after a subscription business model failed in the marketplace.

What is far more significant is that the UK does not produce much ofthe content that is viewed there. Much is imported. And THEY dictatethe terms of how the market works there, not the U.S. mediaconglomerates.

 It is technically feasible for broadcasters to buy content
 from the congloms to fill up those multiplexes. Unfortunately,
 it is not economically viable, because they cannot attract
 enough eyeballs to sell enough commercials to pay for that
 content.
Broadcasters are local. Somehow, the Brits and other Europeans makethe economics work. The main difference I can see is that themultiplexes are nationwide.

This is just a minor difference Bert. I remember when I first gotmarried and my wife and I lived in Atlanta. My mother-in-lay wouldcome to visit and complain that her stories (soap operas) were notavailable in Atlanta. They we just on a different channel number, andin a few cases delayed by a half hour.

The reality Bert, is that every market gets mostly the same contentvia syndication. Other than local news, broadcasting looks nodifferent in most cities than the McDonalds franchises. The viewerdoes not know, or care, whether the stations are owned by thecongloms or an independent broadcaster or station group.

The reason that the economics are different in Europe is simple. Thepoliticians did not create rules that allow the media conglomeratesto reach so deeply into their people's pockets. The most likelyreason for this is that broadcasting started as a State operatedservice in Europe. Commercial broadcasters are a relative recentphenomenon where they exist in Europe. In the U.S. the conglomeratesand the politicians created the illusion of competition (betweenbroadcasters), while they prevented meaningful market basedcompetition for these government regulated industries.

The FCC should go directly to the congloms, and to the major stationgroups too, and ask directly to these companies whether theirinterest would change with national 24/7 coverage. It makes no senseto invent excuses why DTT can't work here.


And the answer would be...

We don't want to change.

We want to increase our profit margins.

Regards
Craig

P.S. what you want is going to happen anyway, but it will cost YOU.No more "free" rides Bert.



----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org

- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
unsubscribe in the subject line.

References:

[opendtv] Re: Ofcom's proposed spectrum auction
From: Albert Manfredi

[opendtv] Re: Ofcom's proposed spectrum auction

Other related posts: