[opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting
- From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2016 23:00:48 -0400
On Oct 2, 2016, at 7:36 PM, Manfredi, Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
So Craig, are you a chronic complainer then? I agree with you on this,
naturally, but it looks like damned if they do, damned if they don't, when it
comes to your comments wrt the FCC.
There's more than a bit of truth in that.
The FCC cannot act without the consent/direction of Congress. I do not always
approve of what Congress tells the FCC to do. This goes back to the decisions
to regulate utilities as natural monopolies, the decision to create the Federal
Radio Commission, and then the FCC. But when they are authorized to do
something, they should do it.
To be fair, even with Congressional authorization, sometimes things don't work
out. Sometimes this is because the FCC acts outside the law, and courts
overturn their decisions. And sometimes it is because they justify their
decisions on laws that have nothing to do with the decision.
For example, it was a huge stretch to regulate broadband under Title II. But
they were urged to do so by the courts, who then upheld their line of
reasoning. Perhaps this will be appealed to a higher court - time will tell.
I think it is important to keep in mind that we now have courts that are acting
outside the law as well, in essence handing down decisions that have the effect
of legislation that could never get through Congress.
So yes, we're damned either way.
You don't get it, Craig. Once you have the neutral Internet, any IP-based
device maker can play on it.
Correct.
Once you have any number of competing devices being used to feed TV sets, or
just to view directly on their own displays, you don't NEED for the
government to regulate what freedom these devices have to give the consumer.
Correct.
The limited devices will be competing against less limited devices, and
people will decide just how much they will be shackled by the equipment
designers.
Nice try, but the device makers are at the mercy of the content owners. Yes,
there will be competition at the device level, but the content deals are often
the real problem. In reality we have three entities involved in these deals:
1. The content owners
2. The companies they license the content to
3. The devices that can be used to access this content.
You could add #4, the ISP, but they are the only one that is subject to net
neutrality regulation. The other three are just businesses doing deals that are
taking advantage of the neutral pipes; they are under no obligation to be
neutral, or to do deals with every device maker.
Title II was essential. Beyond that, competition does the rest.
But it is competition that you complain about endlessly. You tell us that it is
collusion if some device or Internet service does business deals that are
exclusive or restrictive. That is what competition is all about.
That's already happening Bert, but your looking at the wrong monopoly.
The content owners are taking over the MVPD business.
I doubt that.
Who owns Hulu?
Comcast owns who?
The content is all in a handful of server farms, with edge servers at the old
video head ends to handle popular bits, and possibly insert local commercials.
What do the content owners need the MVPDs for?
Careful, it's a loaded question that is yet to be answered.
You are suggesting that, for instance, the .com TV network sites will
disappear, in favor of one single Hulu SVOD.
No. We're not talking about the current Hulu services.
We're talking about the VMVPD Hulu slated for the end of this year - live
streams and VOD access to everything in today's MVPD bundles.
To the extent that websites remain important, I expect that the networks will
use them for promotion and access to some shows. They need the free sites
(including Yahoo View) for the upsell - subscribe to Hulu.
CBS is using their website now to promote All Access subscriptions, but the
value proposition for All Access is not there. Larger bundles will continue to
be the most popular choice, as Laura Martin stated in the B&C article about her
white paper on Omni Media.
This is not happening. What is happening is that the content owners are
using, and considering to use, multiple ways of getting their content out
there. And we have already read articles that explain why this is so. In
short, greed. Every owner wants to sell as much as possible. If the monopoly
pipe is neutral, the content owners will have to try to outdo each other to
find more eyeballs. I think you've always missed this. If the pipe is NOT
neutral, that's when the MVPD model will instantly take hold again.
The MVPD model is not going away Bert. The content owners understand the value
of bundling everyone's content...
You need to "be there" to compete for the eyeballs. Multiple ala carte
subscriptions will not work for the most popular channels the masses watch
today. We may get a little customization ability with smaller core bundles and
add on packs.
Target or Walmart are providing a sales service to Apple, a one-time service.
They get paid for this service. Customers benefit from this service. So
customers pay a little fee to be able to drive to Walmart at a moment's
notice, and find this device. Plus, shelf space is not free either. Look up
"opportunity cost."
Apple and Amazon provide services too. Virtual stores use "rack space" instead
of shelf space. Amazon still needs warehouses for the physical goods it sells.
Like Apple, however, Amazon sells bits.
Those bits may be Apps, music, movies, TV shows, e-books...
Apple sells atoms too - their Internet and physical stores compete with Walmart
and Target Internet and physical stores.
An example of "cost." The content owner can pay the CE vendor to make sure
NOT to allow the equipment to use Yahoo View or any ad-supported site. Bribe
the CE vendor to force all users onto pay sites exclusively. This is not
"just business," unless you think collusion and bribes are "just business."
Basically yes. It's called leverage. If your selling a commodity that anyone
can sell you can't get much leverage. That's why Netflix is investing in
original content. Most of the shows they license from the content owners are
commodities. So exclusive deals are highly desirable.
I don't think the examples you concocted are very realistic.
The other way around is similarly unnecessary, from a customer's point of
view. Apple paying the content owner to make the content available in a
proprietary format, so the Apple customer has to do what Apple prefers.
What proprietary format Bert?
Apple uses industry standards, not proprietary formats.
You may need to develop an App to get on iOS devices (including Apple TV), or
Android devices. I'm not sure how Roku Apps are built. Building streaming media
websites and server farms requires a bit of work too. Both web browsers and
Apps connect to those servers.
There are plenty of shady deals in business, Craig, that you can't explain
away by claiming "just business." I don't know why this needs to be belabored.
There are plenty of shady deals in your industry too, not to mention the city
you live near. Lobbying is quite an interesting business.
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:
- » [opendtv] B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting - Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: B&C: Set-Top Box Proposal Pulled From FCC Meeting- Craig Birkmaier