[opendtv] Re: Distribution outside of "the bundle"
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 01:47:02 +0000
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
>> Craig, broadcasters have no "monopoly" on the MVPD media.
>
> Not true. The a FCC requires their carriage in the most
> basic tier.
And that makes them a monopoly?? Look up the work, Craig.
> For decades they were more than happy to allow CATV systems
> extend their reach, without demanding payment for their signals.
You keep missing the point. CATV systems carried just broadcasters signals, and
charged only nominal fees (or were tax-supported). Then cable systems piled on
a lot of extra channels, in the late 1970s initially, and charged rapidly
escalating prices. I know, because I lived through that era. Every new ad
wanting to lure me in had a higher basic fee. Higher and higher.
And still, even with the added niche channels and the rapidly escalating fees,
whether Craig liked it or not, his fellow MVPD subscribers bitched all the way
up to the Supreme Court, if their favorite network TV channels were ever
interrupted. Those main network TV channels were in greater demand than any,
except maybe ESPN.
Putting all of this together, the broadcasters had every right to demand their
extra pound of flesh, in our US economy. This isn't some socialist country,
Craig, where the government decides what a business should earn, or where the
government can enforce anything as lame as, "but you were making do with ads
alone before!?"
> I am not demanding the broadcast signals.
You submit to a monopoly, you have to do what they allow.
> But the politicians and the oligopolies make demands
Total BS. Politicians do not force me to submit, Craig, and the "oligopolies"
are quite clearly competing against one another, on their respective OTA
channels and on their respective OTT sites. And they make their content
ad-supported only. Neither politicians, nor congloms, seem to be making
unreasonable demands.
Let me repeat: your perspective is distorted by your use of the monopolistic
distribution pipe.
> A Cadillac is not a Chevy.
You would be surprised. Remember that big brouhaha caused by the ignoramus, a
few decades ago, when surprise surprise, they "discovered" that Oldsmobiles
sometimes had "Chevy engines"? Wow, big revelation. Well, how did GM respond?
It quit pretending. All GM engines are now painted the same color. (Not that
Olds engines were better than Chevy engines in any way, but why bother trying
to convince the clueless?)
Cadillacs ride on the same platform, and use the same engines, as other GMs.
And yet, they command a much higher price. Take a look:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_GM_platforms
So, broadcasters can charge extra when their signal is used by MVPDs, for the
same reason. "What the consumer will bear" is what the price is set to, Craig.
You pretend that a given sport has become "a monopoly," just because you happen
to like that one sport and must find an excuse why you aren't responsible for
the high prices. But it doesn't sound convincing. Take up soccer. Take up
badminton. Take up curling.
> I don't watch CBS shows. Lost me more than a decade ago.
You miss the point again. I was describing demand elasticity. If you don't get
that, your complaints are unconvincing.
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.
Other related posts:
