[opendtv] Re: Differing interpretations of the same data

From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Albert Manfredi <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 22:04:28 -0500
On Nov 15, 2014, at 7:25 PM, Albert Manfredi <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> 
wrote:

> I think what's absurd is that I had to bother explaining it. But as you saw 
> in that Variety article I posted, others in the business have figured it out 
> without needing it explained to them. They are dropping some sports coverage. 
> Quoting, "Dish has dropped several regional sports networks in recent years, 
> and DirecTV refused to offer Time Warner Cable’s SportsNet LA, the cable home 
> of the Dodgers, saying the **cost outweighed the benefit**."

What has that got to do with the extended basic bundle? Some MVPD systems 
include regional sports networks some don't. Some offer them in a higher tier. 
Dish has a bit of a dilemma in that they are a national service, so it does not 
make much sense to include networks of only regional interest in the extended 
basic bundle. They may offer them in other bundles. 

The Time Warner Cable Sports Net is only carried on Time Warner systems around 
LA. Here is what Wiki says about this network:

> SportsNet LA is currently carried on Time Warner Cable and a few smaller 
> distributors. Other major distributors, including DirecTV, have not yet 
> reached deals to carry SportsNet LA, leaving the other 70% of the Los Angeles 
> Dodgers market unserved. Major sticking points in negotiations have included 
> the high cost of the channel, and the insistence by Time Warner Cable that 
> SportsNet LA be carried with other mainstream premium channels, rather than 
> in a separate sports tier or on an "a la carte" basis.

> And that's why your "the bundle" has gone into decline. I read just yesterday 
> an article that claims that subscriptions to MVPDs, combined, have already 
> fallen to 79 percent of households. Combine that with cord shavers, and 
> perhaps you'll get it. (Or do you think that the CEOs will wait until 50 
> percent of households have dropped out already?)

They might get worried if the number drops below 70%. But it is still at 85% - 
please provide a real study that says it is below 80%.

>> How absurd. Yesterday I posted an article stating that AMC is not budging 
>> from 
>> the bundle.
> 
> How absurd that you didn't read the article. AMC is already selling through 
> Netflix and direct to consumer, as stated plainly in that article. So they 
> are already covering their bases.

Selling through Netflix is what EVERY content owner does. They sell to the rest 
of the world and Amazon and Apple and... That is the business they are in, and 
always have been. They ARE NOT selling direct to consumer and Sapan says they 
do not plan to do so.


Regards
Craig
[opendtv] Re: Differing interpretations of the same data

Other related posts:
