[opendtv] Re: Comcast-owned NBC blocks Sling TV commercials - Business Insider
- From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 06:50:20 -0400
On Oct 13, 2015, at 6:59 PM, Manfredi, Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Which does not mean people drop the cable service, because that's how they
get their broadband connection. And I'm pretty positive that the majority of
households does not do what you claim, Craig, because installing DBS is not
necessarily a trivial process. OTA could be far easier, for those closer in,
who can use indoor antennas. But I'll bet the vast majority wait it out while
they are whining about it. And that's the reason. They need that cable
connection anyway. They have become totally dependent.
The times they are a changin...
You make a valid point about the growing dependency on the broadband pipe, but
this is a relatively recent addiction. I got by for more than a decade with
DSL; you still use it. But video streaming is giving people good cause to
choose the best service, and in most communities it comes from the cable system.
But DBS started from zero in 1995, and now controls more than a third of the
market. The initial growth came from the ability to deliver MVPD services to
areas where it was not economically feasible to build out the cabled
infrastructure. But the real growth came from consumer dissatisfaction with
cable, and many homes switched during retrans blackouts. To be fair, some homes
switched to cable when a popular service went dark on their DBS system. And
now, broadband is luring people back to cable.
Perhaps the most valid point you make is that a technology inflection point is
driving folks back to the monopoly provider; it is not a coincidence that the
FCC just entrenched this provider by proclaiming it a telecommunications
service they can regulate under Title II.
Net Neutrality is a nice slogan, but the reality is that your OTT revolution is
riding on the backs of the cable and telco monopolists.
A brief aside here. While looking for the percentage of DBS homes I came across
this interesting tidbit from the latest FCC Video Competition Report, issued
last April:
2. MVPDs. From year-end 2012 to year-end 2013, the total number of MVPD video
subscribers posted its first-ever, full-year decline, falling from 101.0
million to 100.9 million households. All of the decrease came from cable MVPDs,
which fell from 56.4 million to 54.4 million. Direct Broadcast Satellite
(“DBS”) MVPD video subscribers increased slightly from 34.1 million to 34.2
million, and telephone MVPD video subscribers increased significantly from 9.9
million to 11.3 million.
3. MVPDs have responded to cord cutters, cord nevers, cord shavers, and the
increased viewing of OVDs by creating and deploying video services similar to
those offered by OVDs.5 These services, referred to as “TV Everywhere,” allow
MVPD subscribers to access both linear and video-on- demand (“VOD”) programming
on a variety of in-home and mobile Internet-connected devices.6 At the end of
2013, most live linear and some on-demand programming was limited to in-home
viewing. Recent initiatives include making more video content available,
supporting more viewing devices, and offering more viewing options for video
programming outside the home.
Maybe you'll believe the FCC that TV Everywhere is a competitive, evolutionary
response from the MVPDs, as you won't believe me. It is their transition path
to an all IP infrastructure.
You can't escape the obvious, Craig. If finding alternatives to that MVPD you
depend on were as trivial as you claim, then retrans consent battles would
not exist. Because the broadcasters would lose every single time. The fact
that retrans consent battles do exist proves my point.
No it proves that two oligopolies have learned to work together to drive up
prices, creating the impression that they are trying to protect subscribers by
pointing fingers at each other. The only loser is the subscriber - the
oligopolies are laughing all the way to the bank.
Like I already said, they should hire "Dish consultant services," to see how
Dish performed that bit of magic. The content owners do cooperate, because
they see their traditional old school model losing steam. And the younger
generations accelerating that process. It's that simple.
It is obvious how Dish performed this bit of magic - they were in the ideal
position to work with the content owners on this "prototype."
1. They do not own content or broadband pipes. They already have an established
relationship with all of the content owners.
2. The front end infrastructure to deliver the service was already in place in
Colorado.
3. The scope of this trial is quite limited, and specifically targeted at
unmarried Millennials. It does not threaten the full service MVPD bundles.
80% of married Millennials with children are signing up for the big bundles.
On the other hand, Comcast is sitting on both sides of the negotiating table,
and twisting arms by leveraging their ownership of NBC. Hardly the ideal
partner to grant the opportunity to launch a service with a national footprint.
Regards
Craig
Other related posts:
