[opendtv] Re: Two articles about sticking it to the TV consumer
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 08:03:41 -0400
At 9:59 AM -0500 10/8/09, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
I'll admit, I've often suggested that the congloms should be allowed
to own their own nationwide OTA network if they so choose. But I
also say that someone else should also be allowed to, and then carry
whatever content they can afford on that OTA network. If they can
make the business model work, with ad revenues and with lower
infrastructure cost than the MVPDs, then I don't see how the
congloms can complain.
You mean an OTA MVPD?
Kinda sounds alot like the spectrum utility idea I have floated for years...
No one is forcing the MVPDs to a restricted footprint, are they? Is
DirecTV limited to covering no more than 39 percent of the US? Or
Comcast? Do they also have local restrictions within each market
that further fragment them as nationwide distribution pipes? If it
were so limited, just how much would that change your equation about
the interest the congloms have in using the MVPDs?
Yes the MVPDs operate with a restricted footprint, at least with
respect to retransmission of local broadcast signals. They cannot
take the east or west coast feeds of the networks and offer them to
any home - they can only offer the local affiliate, unless the home
is not served by local broadcast signals. And they must negotiate for
carriage with everyone, not just the broadcast networks - the channel
line-ups vary from market to market based on these negotiations.
What the congloms do well is to negotiate subscriber fees for their
cable networks. ESPN is now north of $4 per month for EVERY extended
basic subscriber, whether they watch sports or not.
They will make substantially more money when they shut down
transmitters and deal direct with the MVPDs.
That's only true because the rules are unfair. The rules can be
changed. Who knows? With this activist FCC and the political
incorrectness of forcing "the poor and disenfranchised" on
subscription services, anything can happen.
No it is not because the rules are unfair, unless you believe it is
unfair for local affiliates to make a profit. The reality is that the
local broadcasters get a major chunk of all broadcast TV revenues -
nearly half if you include the revenues from local operations of the
network O&Os. And the local broadcasters get the retransmission
consent fees from the MVPDs. The congloms could capture ALL of this
revenue if:
1, they owned a national footprint of broadcast stations;
2. They eliminated all broadcast affiliates and go direct with the
MVPDs as they do with MOST of the content they own.
Also, in your response to Dan, you are suggesting that the congloms
will price themselves out of the game, and that small scale
productions will take their place. I find it truly hard to believe
that everyone will be satisfied watching YouTube videos for their
staple TV entertainment.
MANY people are not satisfied with the programming offered by the
broadcast networks - this is why the ratings are so low and why many
of their better shows are moved quickly to cable networks for
exploitation.
We are not just talking about the You Tube phenomenon. We are talking
about professional producers and good quality talent going direct to
the consumer rather than being forced to deal with the gatekeepers.
It's all about the ability to make viewers aware of your content; the
Internet provides the means for self promotion and distribution, with
the viewer playing a major role in getting the viral promotion engine
working.
Consider what has happened with the development of small computer
applications for Apple's APP store. Anyone with a bit of programming
talent can play - no need to build expensive shrink-wrapped boxes of
software and deal with retail distribution. The consumers rank the
products and create the buzz - or a bump!
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9139163/Bump_app_draws_buzz_at_CTIA
In reality, the gatekeepers limit the production of high quality TV content.
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:
