[opendtv] Re: FierceWireless: How Charlie Ergen turned a satellite TV provider into a spectrum powerhouse, and what he might do next

From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2015 08:22:39 -0500
On Feb 5, 2015, at 10:03 PM, Manfredi, Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> 
wrote:
> 
> You are barking up the wrong tree, Craig. Any content owner can decide to put 
> "linear streams" on the Internet, as a ton of them do over www.wwitv.com, or 
> as ESPN agreed to do over Sling TV, *without* having to beg anyone for 
> anything. The MVPD rules you continue to talk about APPLY TO MIDDLEMEN. They 
> are only there to allow MIDDLEMEN access to valuable content. They ARE NOT 
> there to limit what content owners can do.
> 

True, any content owner can create their own service. But they must sell the 
channels they offer to MVPDs to any MVPD based on the program access rules.

Wwitv is not a MVPD. It is a streaming service that various broadcasters can 
use. In the U.S. There are several dozen stations using the service. But these 
stations cannot stream content they do not have the right for. This user 
comment about a Phoenix CBS affiliate says volumes:

David Hadlock ·  
It makes you sit through a commercial BEFORE telling you the feed is not 
running at the present time! What a total waste of time!


> This is what the FCC says: "This IP transition will enable **cable 
> operators** to untether their video offerings from their current 
> infrastructure, and could encourage them to migrate their **traditional 
> services** to Internet delivery." And Craig's reply is,
> 
>> DUH. They are already doing this with TVE,
> 
> Exactly. A middleman.

No BERT, a migration strategy. The MVPDs do not operate the TVE sites - they 
essentially are selling access to them if you subscribe yo the MVPD linear 
bundles.

This is not much different that what they do today. They get the linear streams 
from a satellite that delivers to all of the MVPDs . The TVE servers replace 
the satellite and can be accessed directly by a subscriber, replacing the 
facilities based feeds with Internet IP access; they also can offer programming 
on demand, which is resource intensive for a MVPD (servers, and last mile 
transport streams). 

In reality MVPDs are just selling subscriptions to multiple content streams. 
The details of those subscriptions vary on each system, but are largely 
similar. They use their own infrastructure (coax, fiber or DBS), to deliver 
these streams. With the Internet it is now possible to bypass the facilities 
based MVPD infrastructure, although with the cable and fiber based systems the 
infrastructure is simply repurposed as an ISP service.

Clearly, it is possible to sell a subscription to multiple TVE services. That 
is the future for MVPDs, and Sling is no different.

> If a middleman wants to emulate over IP what they do with MPEG-2 TS, they 
> have to follow the rules. If the content owner puts stuff online, they can do 
> whatever they please. That's why Sling TV *did not* evolve as the FCC was 
> thinking. Disney agreed to do things a totally different way, and they do not 
> need to go begging to the FCC for this. Nor does Sling TV carry broadcast 
> stations.

Sling will carry broadcast stations. They could not get all of the networks to 
agree to license their content, and they may need to offer local stations in 
each market based on the geo-location of the subscriber. This is no different 
than what they are doing with the DBS service, but requires licensing the 
rights for Internet distribution. In fact they have a leg up on potential 
competitors, as they already have access to all of the local station feeds for 
the DBS service.
> 
> Duh, Craig. And it does not apply to Sling TV. Disney did not have to worry 
> about changing its modus operandi. Nor does Sling TV have to meet whatever 
> other mandates of MVPDs (local content, public affairs channels, bla bla bla).

Sorry, but it does apply to Sling, or to be more accurate, will apply to Sling 
when the current FCC NPRM becomes the actual regulation. 

The fact that Disney, Scripps Howard, and the rest of the networks in the Sling 
packages already did business with Dish simplified the negotiations, but they 
were negotiated assuming that the FCC would extend the program access rules to 
the Internet. The licensing deals and subscriber fees are comparable to what 
other MVPDs pay for these channels.

There are no FCC rules regarding what channels a MVPD service must carry, OTHER 
THAN the provisions regarding access to local broadcasters: in short, cable 
systems must carry local stations if requested, while DBS can sell the local 
stations as an add on. 

> The second part also applies to middlemen. If ABC decides to put their prime 
> time stream live online, for anyone to access, no one can stop that.

Their affiliates can. ABC cannot bypass them under current affiliation 
agreements. If ABC wants to go direct, they can get rid of affiliates. Note 
that CBS All Access only offers their O&O stations to the subscribers in each 
market served. They stated that they were negotiating with affiliates to offer 
their signals in other markets.

This is a fundamental issue. Do we stay with the legacy business model and all 
of the regulations that both limit and protect it, or do we get rid of 
affiliates and license directly to MVPDs like the other several hundred 
networks, or just go direct via the Internet?

> On the other hand, if a MIDDLEMAN wants to do this, that's a different 
> matter. A content owner agreeing to be an OTT site, or to deal with an OTT 
> site, does NOT have to worry about these FCC rules which apply to middlemen.

They will if the OTT site desires yo compete in the MVPD market. That is what 
the NPRM is all about.
> 
>> It is exactly what the FCC thought. It is an internet MVPD service.
> 
> Craig being his usual stubborn, obstinate self. In spite of the utterly 
> obvious.

It is utterly obvious that the NPRM is another extending the program access 
rules to Internet (non facilities based) MVPD competitors.

Regards
Craig
References:
- [opendtv] Re: FierceWireless: How Charlie Ergen turned a satellite TV provider into a spectrum powerhouse, and what he might do next
  - From: Manfredi, Albert E
[opendtv] Re: FierceWireless: How Charlie Ergen turned a satellite TV provider into a spectrum powerhouse, and what he might do next

Other related posts:
