[opendtv] Re: News: Independent Networks, ACA Speak Out Against Program Tying

From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 10:48:26 -0400

Craig Birkmaier wrote:

> I've had this figured out for years Bert. The problem is
> getting you to understand they reasons we have this situation.

Far from it, Craig. The problem is you only understand when your own
mantra is repeated back at you. That's why it takes so long to make you
understand.

>> The reason DBS doesn't change the picture is that DBS can't
>> offer the other services cable now offers, like telephone and
>> broadband access.

> What an absurd conclusion.

> The fact that cable can offer additional appealing services,
> and offer bundling discounts, should (and by the way does) allow
> the cable companies to maintain their market share, despite the
> fact that most consumer surveys show intense dissatisfaction
> with cable companies. But they hate the Telcos too.

You seem to drown yourself in your rhetoric, and yet say nothing
different from what I just said. Read what I wrote, read again your
words, and show me the difference.

>> WiMAX, which is nothing but a warmed over MMDS service, could
>> possibly increase competition here, although for whatever
>> reason, it did not succeed at all in the past.
>
> This would not be competition at all for multi-channel TV. It
> would, however, provide the ability to BYPASS the multi-channel
> systems, using a completely different business model.

Wrong. It would certainly be competition for multi-channel TV. They
could use the same walled garden IPTV scheme, for example, as AT&T does.
Or are you still confusing IPTV with Internet TV? And at the same time,
multiple WiMAX system could be deployed in the same area, with less
hassle than cable or telco systems.

> But this does serve as a perfect example of how the government
> works. Manufacturers are allowed to post mileage figures on
> new vehicles that are unrealistic. Congress passes a goal in
> 1985 to get a CAFE of 27.5 MPG but refuses to force the DOT to
> raise the CAFe requirements on light trucks. And consumers buy
> what they want, not the most fuel efficient vehicles in the
> fleets. So the goal is 27.5, but the reality is 17.1.

So, you finally got there. The Congress could have made the CAFE
requirements apply across the board, Craig, but they did not back then,
and still do not today. And when the mandate increases 35 mpg in ther
near future, even that applies only to automobiles. SUVs and trucks go
up to 27.5 mpg.

Now, pay attention. The people are what matters here. The people vote
with their wallets. Just as your continued harping about a la carte
falls on deaf ears, because fully 85 percent of the population is
perfectly happy paying rates for bundled programs, the fuel economy
mandates fall on deaf ears too. People simply bypassed the more
stringent CAFE requirements placed on cars, by buying trucks.

Only now that gasoline has become very expensive is there any sign of a
change.

Similarly, cable (and DBS) prices are obviously plenty low, or people
would not be paying them so readily. Forcing a la carte through would
take govt regulation, which you claim to oppose. You have to be
consistent in your rhetoric if you expect to have any credibility.

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.

[opendtv] Re: News: Independent Networks, ACA Speak Out Against Program Tying

Other related posts: