EchoStar Chief Says Satellite Deal Will Move Forward

**abarnes** · 03-17-2005 05:40 PM

Originally Posted by bruce

"The only thing preventing us from acquiring that satellite is not getting [Federal Communications Commission] approval." Mr. Ergen said during an analyst call to discuss EchoStar's 2004 financial results. "We intend to move forward with the transaction." He added that he expects approval within three to six months.

If Charlie E expects the sale to take three to six months for approval then Maybe Charlie D can get everyone moved over to rainbow 2 before the sale takes place. No need to lease the sat back from E* and they both get what they want.

Just my .02 cents.

**vurbano** · 03-17-2005 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by abarnes

If Charlie E expects the sale to take three to six months for approval then Maybe Charlie D can get everyone moved over to rainbow 2 before the sale takes place. No need to lease the sat back from E* and they both get what they want.

Just my .02 cents.

Thats the way I see it too. Get the new dish on my roof.

**BFG** · 03-17-2005 06:07 PM

Originally Posted by GreatMac

But it may block it if the HDTV business (Voom) is spun off and sold to Dolan Sr., who wants it to stay in business.

Then the argument that the sale is detrimental to consumers may have a bite.

No, because Dolan Sr. has no control over what Cablevision has already chosen to do with the satellite they own. The FCC can't stop the sale because some third party wants to keep the other voom assests going.

**James Long** · 03-17-2005 06:40 PM

Originally Posted by GreatMac

Hm, did you actually look at the termination provisions?

The satellite sales agreement is a matter of public record. It is redacted, but not so much that it prevents one from knowing the terms.

The FCC must approve the deal within 12-15 months or the deal is off.
BOTH parties must do everything needed to work TOWARD FCC approval and all the other provisions of the contract. No welching on the deal other than:
The deal can be cancelled by mutual agreement of both parties (E*/Cablevision).

JL

**jbphoenix** · 03-17-2005 06:43 PM

Originally Posted by BFG

The FCC wont block it and require cablevision to continue to lose money when they want out of the business. And Charles E* wont do anything with Dolan that causes Ergen to lose money. Ergen is strictly a profit-only guy, and a smart and rich man for that approach...

If the Govt. offered a substantial 5 year tax break to big satellite and cable companies who offered a certain amount of HD programming packages, E* would be the first one to jump on board... Unfortunately, this will probably never happen. The Govt. did give PBS stations around the country grants for their HD stations to promote the growth of HDTV, but you can only watch a certain amount of documentaries over and over again...
I have been a subscriber to V* since Feb. 2004 and I am hoping that C. Dolan can make his bid to continue V* a reality. I live in AZ and I am considering writing a letter to Sen. John McCain concerning my disappointment with satellite and cable companies and their lack of willingness to bring more HD programming to the public.. May not make any difference, but then again, the FCC was established to make sure the public was served in their best interest by Broadcasters, so I figure if we don't speak up, then we will still be at the mercy of large satellite and cable companies holding the technology back for years to come. After all, the large networks, CBS, NBC, ABC, WB and even UPN and FOX are now providing more and more HD content, so why can't the PAY TV services start providing more content!?

**mdonnelly** · 03-17-2005 07:09 PM

Originally Posted by jbphoenix

... I live in AZ and I am considering writing a letter to Sen. John McCain concerning my disappointment with satellite and cable companies and their lack of willingness to bring more HD programming to the public.. May not make any difference, but then again, the FCC was established to make sure the public was served in their best interest by Broadcasters, so I figure if we don't speak up, then we will still be at the mercy of large satellite and cable companies holding the technology back for years to come. ...

You know, Congress doesn't give a hoot about HDTV. What they ARE interested in is DIGITAL TV. They want to recover the analog spectrum and auction it off. They couldn't care less if broadcasters want to put HD on their digital signal or not.

**GreatMac** · 03-17-2005 07:29 PM

Originally Posted by justalurker

The satellite sales agreement is a matter of public record. It is redacted, but not so much that it prevents one from knowing the terms... No welching on the deal other than:
The deal can be cancelled by mutual agreement of both parties (E*/Cablevision).

JL

The point of redacting IS precisely to prevent you from knowing the terms.

If it was as simple as "no welching", they would have saved themselves the legal fees and have you draft the agreement.

As it is, we don't know the terms, so there is no point to speculate.

**mdonnelly** · 03-17-2005 07:34 PM

Originally Posted by GreatMac

...As it is, we don't know the terms, so there is no point to speculate.

Since we don't know the terms, we can do nothing BUT speculate.

**GreatMac** · 03-17-2005 07:42 PM

Originally Posted by BFG

No, because Dolan Sr. has no control over what Cablevision has already chosen to do with the satellite they own. The FCC can't stop the sale because some third party wants to keep the other voom assests going.

Dolan Sr. has in fact quite a bit of control over Cablevision. If it is determined that cancelling the sale agreement pursuant to its termination provisions and including it in the assets to be sold to Dolan Sr. would be in the best interest of Cablevision and its shareholders, then the sale can be terminated.

Originally Posted by BFG

The FCC wont block it and require cablevision to continue to lose money when they want out of the business

I think you are wrong about this. The government imposes costly obligations on companies all the time (e.g., DTV shareholders wanting out of a loosing business and willing to sell to E*). The FCC may determine that this specific sale (to E*) would be detrimental to consumer interests, and that will be that.

**gutter** · 03-17-2005 07:51 PM

Originally Posted by bruce

3/17 E* Earnings call:
This is also in Sean's sig, and at the last Charlie Chat 4 days ago he reminded everyone that watched it that the deal was for the bird and he said no for the Voom programing.
If.

Bruce this is not a flame but a question. I read the Charlie Chat and I did not read that he said an deliberate and emphatic no to VOOM programming. What I read was he said that the deal was only for the bird and that his desire was to put HD on that bird once he owns it. (Hard to tell with all the ummm and Huhs in his song and dance."

Sincerly, Can you quote from the Chat that VOOM HD or any original programming he said no too? I will have to admit, I may have missed or misread it a few days ago.

Thanks