[opendtv] Re: Broadcasters vs. MVPDs: Economic effects of digital transition on television program supply
- From: Kilroy Hughes <Kilroy.Hughes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 01:18:44 +0000
Cable operators have a new "marketing tool" just approved by the FCC in the
case of Cablevision ...
They can kill the clear analog and digital channels currently delivered to
"cable ready" TVs and HDTVs, PVRs, Media PCs, etc. that are currently watching
Basic tier local broadcast retransmission. I can understand wanting to use all
those analog channels for DOCSIS 3, VOIP, VOD, etc. that generates more revenue
than a duplicate TV signal, but the justification for scrambling the
retransmitted Basic digital broadcast signals is a bit harder to justify as a
consumer benefit or technical necessity.
The FCC decision allows them to scramble the Basic tier clear QAM signals so
TVs and other devices currently getting their local digital stations over cable
will go dark. I've heard cable operators will offer each household up to two
addressable settop boxes for free so consumers can have Basic tier (or buy
expanded Basic, etc.) enable or disabled at any time from the headend (no pole
climbing and filters necessary to limited from expanded Basic to "lifeline"
Basic). Tuning inside a TV or PVR won't work anymore, but maybe you can teach
your Tivo to control the new STB using an IR repeater. No more ability for a
PVR to record a couple programs while watching another.
I guess it was just too easy to connect a cable to an ATSC TV and tune in those
local broadcast channels, and too hard for cable operators to take them away
without a truck roll. Now that we'll be forced to use an operator provided
STB, I expect we'll have to jump through hoops and pay extra to get only Basic
channels.
Actually, I finally found an ATSC antenna that sorts through the multipath
coming from different directions where I live (a flat active array), so I do
fine with ATSC, discs, and IP packets; I already cut the cable.
Kilroy Hughes
-----Original Message-----
From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Tom Barry
Sent: Monday, January 11, 2010 2:23 PM
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [opendtv] Re: Broadcasters vs. MVPDs: Economic effects of digital
transition on television program supply
It seems likely to me the cable price increases are somewhat because cable
became more competitive with OTA as the digital transition
progressed. Some of that, at least in my case, was that OTA became
more difficult to receive. Though the cable price increases eventually drove
me back to OTA again.
But I guess that's how a market equilibrium is supposed to work. Things are
not priced right if some percentage of people are not rejecting the purchase
price. If I move to another city I'll probably again take advantage of some
introductory offer and then again cancel when they try to sneak in increases
after the teaser rates expire.
- Tom
Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
> A very interesting read:
>
> http://www.indiana.edu/~telecom/people/faculty/waterman/Broadcastersvs
> mvpds-DW.pdf
>
> Of note:
>
> MVPDs have been able to benefit more from the digital transition than have
> OTA broadcasters. Why? Simple. They have been able to increase their rates,
> for the digital tier, for HDTV delivery, for VOD and PPV (although these last
> two are barely a blip on the radar). And cable also gets broadband and
> telephone subscribers.
>
> But in addition, cable has been able to increase the rate they charge for
> their analog basic tiers, faster than the rate of inflation.
>
> So, this increased profitability is simply a function of MVPDs being capable
> of charging more, even when their costs are not increased to deliver a given
> service, and of consumers being willing to pay more, even when they get no
> improvement in service. Examples of this are HDTV, a small increase in cost
> but large increase in the digital and premium tier fees, and in the increase
> in revenues for the basic analog tier.
>
> I guess that's the point I've been trying to make about subscribers seeing
> themselves as "victims."
>
> 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.
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
