[opendtv] Re: How to Watch the Oscars Online, and Why You Probably Can't

From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2015 23:21:12 -0500
Amazing how Bert just ignored the most irritant stuff in my post...
Regards
Craig
> On Mar 1, 2015, at 8:53 PM, Manfredi, Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> 
> wrote:
> 
> More likely, the obstacle is only between the MVPDs themselves.

Ahhh...YEAH!

Why would a cable company with a franchise to serve a community want to help an 
out of market MVPD sell competing services? 

I'm not even sure if it would be legal under municipal franchise agreements.

> The content owners should have no problem licensing the content to anyone who 
> will pay them what they ask, per subscriber. But the MVPDs don't like the 
> extra competition. They objected loudly to Verizon FiOS, remember? Why would 
> they not bitch even louder against totally open season like this?

The content owners are not the issue; they already license the content to all 
of the MVPD services and are now starting to license to VMVPD services.

No doubt they may not be happy with new competition, like Dish Sling, but 
actually hosting equipment to enable a competitor is another matter.

>> It already has happened, Craig, and I've stated this on **many** occasions. 
>> Else, TVE couldn't exist. Why are you asking this again? If there are 
>> bottlenecks created when the increased demand occurs, they can be resolved 
>> in relatively short order, on a case by case basis.

Do you have to make absurd statements just to disagree? It has not happened. 
Every local cable or fiber System that sells MVPD services still uses those 
pipes to deliver linear streaming networks. Some still offer analog and digital 
MVPD services.

All I was asking you to do is agree that at some point in the future these 
facility based systems will move to an all IP infrastructure and deliver 
whatever their MVPD package looks like in the future via their broadband ISP 
service. And yes, this means competitors will have access to their ISP 
customers.

But you cannot even agree to that...
;-(

> Exactly, and willing to pay for it.

They were already paying for it. But Comcast was asking Netflix to pay access 
fees in addition to what they were paying Akamai and Cogent to deliver their 
bits to Comcast.

So they just got rid of the middlemen and started to pay Comcast to connect 
directly, and to host the Netflix Open Connect Appliances (edge servers).
>> 
>> The simple answer is that Comcast would need to locate an
>> edge server at my Cox head end if the traffic overwhelmed a
>> peering interconnection service.
> 
> Hey Craig, Comcast ALREADY has to make its TVE available over Cox or other 
> ISP nets, right?

Correct. But this is not likely to use many bits, or require local edge 
servers. Look at how Netflix now handles this - they still rely on peering 
agreements when peak data rates are below 5Gbps - that's a bunch of streams at 
5-10 Mbps

A Comcast customer might be staying in Gainesville at a hotel that has Cox ISP 
service, but is unlikely that thousands of Comcast customers would be in 
Gainesville using the Comcast Xfinity To Go App. 

On the other hand, if I could buy my MVPD service from Comcast, as you suggest, 
and many other Cox ISP customers did the same, then a local Comcast edge server 
might be required. 

> That's what TVE means. No matter where you are, you can get your home MVPD's 
> TVE content. The *only* problem is that if your street address happens to be 
> a Cox street address, you can only deal with Cox. A totally anachronistic and 
> artificial added-on constraint.

I can deal with Cox, DirecTV, Dish, and Dish Sling NOW - all provide 
authentication so that I can connect to The TVE services operated by the 
content owners. Comcast Xfinity To Go is an extension of the facilities based 
VOD services they have offered for several years. It is not the same as TVE, 
but does many of the same things.

> Explain this concern, please. The FCC is simply mandating that Cox, or 
> Comcast or whoever, cannot block or throttle content being sent over the 
> broadband slice of bandwidth you subscribe to.

The new rules will allow the FCC to regulate interconnections at several 
levels, to set the rates for interconnections, and to shift costs by setting 
rates below actual cost - i.e.  an OTT service could be required to pay higher 
interconnect fees, which they would have to pass along to subscribers, or fees 
could be set below the cost to provide the interconnect service, which would 
cause cost shifting. 


> Yes, that is a definite threat. A non-neutral Internet, caused by broadband 
> being the sole province now of cable TV companies, companies with a long 
> history of non-neutral behavior, is an even more imminent threat.

Which can be addressed better by legislation, which will not be tied up for 
years in legal challenges.
> 
>> Does Amazon ship everything from one central warehouse Bert?
> 
> Thanks for making my point, Craig! Amazon has no problem with billing people 
> from anywhere in the world, and similarly, Comcast TVE packages can be made 
> available to anyone in the world (or certainly within the US).

I did not make your point. I showed why your point is absurd.

Comcast does not have servers at every local ISP in the country. They may have 
some distributed servers as they are the largest MVPD/ISP provider in the U.S. 

To make Comcast MVPD services available to anyone it the world require 
infrastructure that Comcast does not currently possess. They would need yo 
build out a CDN as Netflix is doing.

> The fact that Amazon may have warehouses located in many places, and Comcast 
> may have video servers distributed throughout the country, is totally 
> irrelevant. You suggested that billing was a problem. I say bull.

I'm saying it is an infrastructure problem if it attracts a large number of 
subscribers from competing MVPD/ISP service providers.

> Let me repeat this more slowly, then, Craig. Sling TV is for sports fans.

You are mistaken.

> Instead of paying a huge monthly fee primarily for watching ESPN, they can 
> now get ESPN by paying $20. Surely, this is not difficult to grasp.

It is very difficult to grasp. 

Hardly anyone pays for the traditional extended basic MVPD bundles just to 
watch ESPN. And real sports nuts want other regional sports nets as well. The 
same will be true for Sling; in fact I expect their subscribers to be less 
interested in sports. 

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: How to Watch the Oscars Online, and Why You Probably Can't
  - From: Manfredi, Albert E
[opendtv] Re: How to Watch the Oscars Online, and Why You Probably Can't

Other related posts:
