[opendtv] Re: Barriers eroding to LCD TV adoption

  • From: Tom Barry <trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 08:53:21 -0400

Craig Birkmaier wrote:

 > Offering a slimmed down multichannel service at a slimmed down price
 > via OTA broadcasts has not proven to be successful. It is difficult
 > for a 20-30 channel service to offer the 10-20 channels that YOU want
 > to watch; if a slimmed down service only offers a few of the channels
 > that YOU now watch, it is unlikely that you will choose to save
 > $15-20 per month and give up the stuff you want to watch. You are
 > still writing a check, its just a little smaller.

and

 > The bottom line is obvious. The technology exists to deliver 40-50
 > channels of content reliably in EVERY TV market via OTA broadcasts.
 > The reality is that broadcasters "chose poorly."

I'm not sure how these two fit together.  It would seem that if you 
could offer 40-50 OTA channels then a service like USDTV could operate 
as a shared billing service to allow some of those channels to be 
premium channels with better content and fewer ad's.  And all the 
existing MSO models suggest there would be a market for this at some price.

- Tom

Craig Birkmaier wrote:
> At 4:27 AM -0700 8/11/04, John Willkie wrote:
> 
>>So, you are now asserting that broadcasting is not valuable?  Perhaps to
>>you, but even that is inconsistent with your previous posting calling
>>non-payments to be payments.  To bring it full circle, do you think that
>>cable company are making your "payments" for something that has no value?
> 
> 
> You are twisting my words to your purpose...unsuccessfully!
> 
> Of course the content offered by broadcasters is valuable. In and of 
> itself, however, it does not have sufficient value to cause people to 
> give up their multi-channel services and go back to an antenna 
> (exclusively).
> 
> As I noted, the big networks once again control 90% of the audience. 
> Half of this is still via the content they push through the broadcast 
> networks. The other half is via the cable/DBS networks that are NOT 
> available to OTA viewers.
> 
> Consumers now accept the reality that they must subscribe to a 
> multichannel service to get the broad spectrum of content they want 
> to watch. They also accept the reality that they must pay even more 
> to watch content that is not cluttered with commercials. It is in 
> this environment that broadcasters must learn to compete.
> 
> Offering a slimmed down multichannel service at a slimmed down price 
> via OTA broadcasts has not proven to be successful. It is difficult 
> for a 20-30 channel service to offer the 10-20 channels that YOU want 
> to watch; if a slimmed down service only offers a few of the channels 
> that YOU now watch, it is unlikely that you will choose to save 
> $15-20 per month and give up the stuff you want to watch. You are 
> still writing a check, its just a little smaller.
> 
> If, on the other hand, you can offer 20-30 advertiser supported 
> channels for free, you may attract a share of the audience. This has 
> proven to be the case in Germany and the UK.
> 
> 
> 
>>You really have no guess as to what's viable due to biases.  A rotor (or
>>multinational array) is more expensive and troublesome than stringing
>>hundreds of kilometers of high-grade cable, providing linear power back-up
>>circuits, line amplifiers, drops, etc?
> 
> 
> You really have no clue about the realities of consumer behavior. 
> Fact is that the cable and DBS infrastructures already exist. That is 
> the reality of what broadcasters must compete with TODAY.
> Equally important, the cost of establishing service is not paid by 
> the broadcaster; the consumer must invest in the receiver, and any 
> antennas, rotors, etc. necessary to achieve reliable reception.
> 
> The standard for service today is Plug & Play. Once the cable company 
> or DBS service is installed, you just pick up the remote and surf. 
> Broadcasters must equal this experience if they are to be 
> competitive. IF you need to play with a rotor, or move the antenna 
> manually, you are not competitive.
> 
> The bottom line is obvious. The technology exists to deliver 40-50 
> channels of content reliably in EVERY TV market via OTA broadcasts. 
> The reality is that broadcasters "chose poorly."
> 
> Regards
> Craig
> 
> 
> 
>  
>  
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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.
> 
> 
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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.

Other related posts: