[opendtv] Re: Sony U.S execs: Expect a robust holiday season

At 6:56 PM -0500 11/20/05, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
>I got beyond that, Craig. People make decisions based on
>what their OPTIONS are. So, for example, people went along
>leasing their telephone equipment from "The Bell System" for
>many decades, until the government stepped in and split up
>AT&T. Phone equipment in people's homes used to have enscribed
>"Property of the Bell System," or words to that effect. And
>the situation in Europe was the same, with each country's
>telecom.

This is interesting but largely irrelevant to the discussion. As you 
point out, this was not a market driven industry. It was a monopoly, 
just like broadcast TV until cable came along.

>  > Take your example. Nobody is forcing ANYONE to subscribe to
>>  cable or DBS.
>
>Just as no one had a gun to anyone's head to subscribe to
>AT&T's telephone product. But people made that decision based
>on what options they had.

Unbelievable. There was NO OTHER CHOICE. You either had to go to Ma 
Bell, or forego having a phone.

When cable, and then DBS came along people had another choice, not 
just the OTA Broadcast monopoly.

>
>Now, with the tuner mandate/cable agreement, the govt has
>similarly stepped in, trying to recover RF spectrum, but at
>the same time breaking up the control TV service providers
>have. With the standard cable/OTA receiver, the owners of the
>equipment, you and me, can subscribe to any umbillical service,
>and/or select OTA stations, without being overly beholden to
>any one service.

Even this is not true Bert. Yes, if you want to buy an integrated 
receiver you can get OTA and ONE -WAY cable. But you cannot get 
TWO-WAY cable or DBS, which requires another box.

Thus the GOVERNMENT is favoring certain competitors in a heavily 
controlled marketplace, and they are requiring people to buy 
receivers they may not want or use.

If we were to follow your original analogy, the parallel would be for 
the government to get the hell out of mandating how TVs are designed.

>  > Is this modern capitalism at work?
>
>Yes, of course it is. Modern capitalism depends on controls
>against monopolies. In any event, I think this topic should be
>analyzed in its broader context, because I doubt the general
>public *prefers* their TV service, or telephone service, or
>many other services they need on a long term basis, to be run
>by monopolies. Even if they accept this situation at times.

The only CONTROLS that are necessary with capitalism are anti-trust 
laws. if the government gets into the middle of an industry and 
regulates it and mandates product design you no longer have 
capitalism, or competition for that matter. You have a government 
controlled oligopoly.

I certainly do not prefer monopolies, or government mandates that 
interfere with competition.

But you seem to think there is something noble in the government 
telling manufacturers and consumers that they need to prop up a dying 
franchise that would no longer exist ( in its current form) without 
government protection.

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.

Other related posts: