[opendtv] Re: Controversial VMAs puts fresh spotlight on the
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2013 12:24:45 -0400
Regards
Craig
On Sep 6, 2013, at 8:21 PM, "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
> The reason MVPD addicts pay ever higher prices is because they bring this
> onto themselves. When there is no demand elasticity, consumers will see high
> prices. I don't know how many times this has to be repeated, to get the
> obvious across.
There is no demand elasticity because governments at all levels are supporting
oligopolies that control a product that is in great demand.
When governments get a significant percentage of the take AND a propaganda tool
that helps keep them in power, there can be no meaningful competition. The only
alternative for the consumer is to do without something they place a high value
on.
Do you do without electricity?
Do you do without running clean water?
Do you use an outhouse?
Consumers see high prices for all of these necessities as well.
It is really a question of what you place the highest value upon.
Clearly the level of pain is not sufficient to cause more than 80% of U.S.
homes to change their behavior. Monopolists and politicians depend on this.
> Or let me put it another way. The high prices ARE NOT caused by politicians,
> as you keep saying. No politician has ever forced me to subscribe to an MVPD.
> No politician has ever forced Disney to transmit ESPN only over MVPDs. No
> politician has ever forced MVPDs to bundle content. No politician has ever
> forced the MVPDs to use non-standard, proprietary protocols, in order to push
> unnecessary rental hardware on people. No politician has ever forced the
> major networks to cease FOTA or FOTI program streams. If anything, it's
> exactly the opposite.
Sorry Bert, but as you say, it is exactly the opposite.
One of the greatest powers the mass media has lies in their ability NOT to do
something. If the media chooses NOT to cover a story, because it might reflect
badly on the politicians, the masses may never hear about it.
Likewise, if the politicians and regulators choose NOT to apply laws and
regulations equally, or worse, they put in place laws and regulations that
encourage monopolistic behavior, they can have a huge influence on all of this
things you cite above.
More than a century ago, the big industrialists and the politicians set all of
this into motion when they conspired to create a lucrative partnership based in
a questionable assumption…
That utilities are natural monopolies; industries that need to be regulated by
the politicians, and in MANY cases owned and run by the politicians.
This philosophy was extended to regulation of wired communications and the
airwaves, and in many cases the content that can be delivered via these
technologies.
It is true that the government cannot force you to buy electricity and water;
that they cannot force you to subscribe to a telephony service; that they
cannot force you to subscribe to an MVPD.
They cannot force you to breathe either.
But the politicians CAN help their friends to run these oligopolies in a manner
that enriches both the politicians and the oligopolies, while shielding them
from anti-trust regulations that competitive industries must obey.
The politicians GAVE the NFL and other sports franchises exemptions from
anti-trust laws.
The politicians gave broadcasters the right to collect retransmission consent
fees for the signals they give away via the Free Over the Air TV service.
The politicians continue to allow the MVPDs to use bundling techniques that are
illegal for most industries.
And now they are turning the anti-trust laws on their head when one company
turns on another in an emerging industry. Amazon has seriously disrupted the
publishing industry, by selling books that are in high demand for less than
they pay for them. Historically this has been called dumping and is illegal
under anti-trust laws. It should be noted than any business can sell products
below cost (loss leaders) to get people into the store; but they cannot do this
on a continuing basis for a single product to run competitors out of business.
Yet the government sued the publishers and Apple for attempting to institute a
pricing structure that allows competitors to operate profitably.
Yes Bert, the politicians CAN, and THEY DO have tremendous influence on
everything you say they cannot do.
From my recent cable bill:
Taxes, Fees and Surcharges
TV Fees
FCC Fee (single Family) $0.08
State Communications Service Tax $7.00
Local Communications Service Tax $5.27
State Sales Tax $0.51
Total TV Fees $12.86
That's for one month!
And most of these fees are based on a percentage of your bill. So what
incentive is there for the politicians to control the increase in cost of these
services, much less kill this cash cow?
> The high prices are caused instead by addicted consumers. The article you
> posted says there are a lot of addicts. Ergo, you get outrageous prices. QED.
Some people are addicted to tobacco.
Some people are addicted to alcohol.
In every case the politicians leverage our human desires.
If we didn't want this stuff, they wouldn't try to control it and tax it.
Crony Capitalism at its finest!
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:
