[opendtv] Re: Early UHF in DC and Baltimore

From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 08:43:41 -0400

On Aug 10, 2016, at 12:37 AM, Manfredi, Albert E
<albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Craig Birkmaier wrote:

The subscribers have no real say, although they do get pissed when
channels they watch go dark in retrans disputes.

Which only proves how important the TV networks are to MVPD subscribers, even
though these channels are also available OTA. Which gives you an idea why
retrans consent makes perfectly good sense.

It is not just the broadcast networks, although they still offer enough
important content to be useful in the blackout scam. The same tactics have been
used by A&E, ESPN and other MVPD networks. This is to be expected - the best
leverage is realized just before programs/events that attract large audiences.

The fact that you can still get the networks with an antenna is interesting,
but obviously not important. Most people who subscribe to MVPD services do not
want to put up an antenna.

But we will all have a good laugh when it turns out that instead of
an unlimited number of competitors in the TV content market, the
Internet will be little different than the current oligopoly...

In your dreams, perhaps.

Sorry, but it is already happening.

The differences are too many, too huge, and too driven by technology, between
the two models, to make such a thing remotely possible.

It has nothing to do with technology other than the one area I already
discussed - VOD. The ability to offer huge libraries of "used" TV content on
demand has changed the way this content is consumed and enabled new SVOD and
AVOD services to become popular. The major beneficiaries are the media congloms
who own all of these old shows (and movies).

Moving the existing content oligopoly to Internet distribution is already a
work in progress. TVE is a major factor, eliminating dependency on the MVPD
umbilicals. Sling is an experiment with different bundling techniques. And the
announced Hulu VMVPD has the potential to fundamentally change the architecture
of MVPD systems, eliminating the dedicated video pipes, replacing them with
edge servers at the MVPD head ends.

AS LONG AS the neutrality mandate exists. Obviously, take away the neutrality
mandate, and that would easily change. (Unless you get many more broadband
providers competing everywhere, as we once had with dialup ISPs.)

Neutrality has nothing to do with this Bert. Neutrality was already a reality
before the Title II order. It is technically feasible to make every TV series
ever produced an AVOD or SVOD website, or for every existing live linear TV
network to go direct with both their live and library content.

But from an economic perspective this is NOT going to happen. Bundling is
always going to be cheaper and will always be used to leverage new original
content to sell old library content, as we have already seen with Netflix and
Amazon a Prime Video.

After the transition to Internet distribution is complete, which is still going
to take years, the media congloms can easily disadvantage competitors by not
licensing library content to them. Which raises the question:

Can SVOD services like Netflix and Amazon Prime, ramp up original content
production to the level necessary to make these services attractive WITHOUT
content from the media congloms?

No Bert. To decide to include something it must first be offered for
sale in the U.S.

Whoa mama. You can't be that uninformed. Over the Internet, as long as
someone owns content, he can make that content available to whoever he
pleases.

True. But the Internet does not offer the reliability of dedicated video
distribution networks like satellite or private broadband links. And it's not
free.
It still costs a lot to buy a dedicated link with enough bandwidth to support
network operations.

If there was an economically viable market to put international broadcasters on
MVPD systems it would be happening.

You don't need any local US representation, nor does anything have to be for
sale in the US, necessarily. I suppose, if your content is very popular, you
might want to enlist the help of local CDNs. Otherwise, it's the owner's call.

Sorry Bert, but that's absurd.

The localized versions of international TV networks are already available to
anyone who wants to watch them. At least the shows they own or have
international distribution rights to place on the Internet. To build a U.S.
audience for foreign networks you need English translation and the ability to
sell ads to pay for the service.

All the foreign networks you talk about are in fact licensed to MVPDs
- in the nation's they serve.

What? I'm talking about networks I watch. And I have no MVPD subscription.
Get it? The entire Internet model is different from your MVPD mindset.

No Bert. You are talking about International networks that choose to place
their news content on the Internet. In the countries where they operate this
content may also be available via antenna and MVPD systems. You do not get
access to programs for which they do not license international distribution
rights. This content is either geoblocked or not available at all via the
Internet.

In most cases the programs are licensed to a middleman

You have to be joking! Try this:

http://www.tf1.fr/tf1/programmes-tv

Really. These are Spanish language versions of old U.S. TV series. The first
episode I tried to stream was geoblocked.

You should be able to watch at least the news programs and some of the
videos, because they allow that.

It's all about licensing rights Bert. There is no free lunch here.

Maybe not the full length shows, because THEY don't allow it. Other foreign
networks do the same thing. The Germans allow streaming their full length TV
episodes too. The US TV networks do the same thing. No middlemen, Craig. Not
unless they want to use middlemen, e.g. in aggregation sites like Hulu,
Netflix, Amazon, etc.

Maybe not what you are claiming...

The network dot.com sites are delayed and do not offer critical programming,
especially live sports. Even CBS All Access cannot stream NFL games.

While it is "possible" for everyone to go direct, it is not likely to happen
unless they offer very cheap subscriptions or per episode prices. Nobody
watches only one network. Bundles will always have an advantage, and middlemen
like Hulu are needed to provide the illusion of competition.

It will be interesting to see whether the VMVPD bundle announced by Hulu will
be challenged on anti-trust grounds.

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.

References:
- [opendtv] Re: Early UHF in DC and Baltimore
  - From: Manfredi, Albert E

[opendtv] Re: Early UHF in DC and Baltimore

Other related posts: