[opendtv] Re: Market forces
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2013 18:08:41 -0400
On Jun 8, 2013, at 6:24 PM, Albert Manfredi <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> We've been around this cycle at least once already, Craig. With IP
> distribution, the content owners can still get their dual revenue streams and
> exclusivity, AND they wouldn't be beholden to the bundling decisions the
> MVPDs make.
I can't even agree with Bert without getting grief.
Assume for a moment that the congloms decide to offer their content via OTT
services on an ala carte basis; you just pay the subscriber fees for the
channels you want. And let's assume that the cable and DBS systems also offer
channels on an ala carte basis.
If this were to happen, there would be no real difference between these systems
with respect to the streaming of a channel; of course this assumes that you can
buy the channel for roughly the same price from any of these distribution
infrastructures. You would still have infrastructure costs for any of these
systems; broadband is not free.
It is the exclusivity of content via MVPDs that makes the bundling tactics
work. End this exclusivity, end the problem.
>
> Remember? So for example, CBS would not have to obsess over the fact that CBS
> content will get bundled with expensive ESPN content, which doesn't benefit
> CBS in any way.
CBS does not obsess about this today; in fact they like it.
Every subscriber to the system pays the CBS retrains fee, whether they want the
channel or not; dittos for ESPN.
If CBS decided to end the exclusivity of some of their content (mostly live
shows and sports) they would risk NOT getting the retrains fees (or new OTT
subscriber fees) from some percentage of the public. I certainly would not pay
for CBS, and many others would drop them too. In reality,
CBS has enough good content that most homes might pay for it, while dropping
dozens of other channels they do not watch.
> But in any event, you strayed very far from my point. Which was, EVEN IF the
> MVPDs want to transmit all of their content encrypted, for a totally a la
> carte model, that STILL doesn't justify the use of proprietary STBs. If MVPDs
> continue to use proprietary STBs, it is purely because the monthly rent gives
> them another revenue stream.
If they do not allow others to offer alternatives, and you don't want to pay
for their box, you would have the option of buying the channels you want via
the Internet. End of Story.
>
> As always, consumers have to rebel to make things right. I was amused by your
> other post, which showed how retrans consent revenues will increase by
> whatever huge percent. As long as lemmings gladly pay up, why should this
> change? It won't. Market forces, like the subject says.
This is the classing behavioral model for monopolies and oligopolies. When
market forces are absent, you can pay the going rate or do without.
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:
