[opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2016 23:45:38 +0000
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
The local monopoly is caused by the simple fact that multiple
simultaneous competitors cannot install the coax wire plant
through every neighborhood.
It is no longer a local monopoly Bert, unless you are
referring to the technology that is making your vision
a reality...
Broadband.
Of course, Craig. And again. You're still dancing around the issue.
MVPDs used to be a local monopoly, BUT, a monopoly for a fairly frivolous and
unessential service. As such, the FCC wisely stayed away from over-regulation,
and so we have this collusion between them and content owners, that you pretend
to dislike. I mean, we still had and have FOTA TV, to cover all bases, so MVPD
subscription is hardly essential for anyone.
Now, these same local monopoly cable companies have taken on a far more
critical role, a broadband telecom role, so the FCC wisely slapped Title II on
them. So, instead of being relieved that broadband won't become the same
"oligopoly" colluding with content owners that it was in MVPD days, that you
sometimes pretend to dislike, now you're complaining about Title II.
No Bert. Cable was "re-regulated" in 1992, along with a gift to
the content conglomerates - retransmission consent.
That's crap, Craig. The retrans consent rule only gave a subset of content
owners, on these local "info service" monopolies, the same benefits and
privileges that all the other content owners, on these local info service
monopolies, already had. It was nothing more than the FCC saying, yes, we agree
with the OTA stations. If the suckers subscribed to your local monopolies
insist that they want the OTA stations on your for-pay-only cable, then the OTA
stations have a perfect right to demand their pound of flesh.
That's all the retrans consent regulation did. They could have mandated
complete neutrality, but technologically speaking, that would have been
unnatural, what with this natural head-end one-way broadcast gatekeeper in the
cable or DBS broadcast medium. That, and the fact that this was still a fairly
frivolous entertainment service only, meant that the FCC still regarded cable
as a Title I service. Take-it-or-leave-it "info service."
As a result, the content owners are allowed to force the MVPDs
to buy their bundles
Oh really, Craig? Funny, but I recall distinctly that even in 1978, bundles
existed, and that subscribers were forced to buy only a limited number of
bundles. I also recall that between 1978 and 1985 or so, the prices for these
bundles soared. That is, after all, what convinced me to say "never."
I'm not panicking Bert because you've got it wrong.
And yet you fall into the same trap every single time I set it for you, Craig.
Convince me you aren't panicking. "Gloom and doom" and "concern," trying to
prop up the steeply declining statistic, not to mention continuing to reduce
your criterion for worrying (remember it used to be 80%, until we fell under
that in no time at all?). Sounds like panic to me. You simply can't have it
both ways. Your model promotes collusion, and you panic when it goes into steep
decline. Own it, Craig.
Local monopolies can collude because that local monopoly service is a pretty
unregulated, "who-cares" Title I service. But over broadband, which continues
to be a local monopoly, they cannot collude, only thanks to Title II, and now
you oppose that too.
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.
Other related posts:
- » [opendtv] Downside of cord cutting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting - Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- John Shutt
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Downside of cord cutting- Craig Birkmaier