Could we campaign Euro FTA providers to transmit here?

Status
Please reply by conversation.

freezy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Original poster
Apr 19, 2009
960
0
Land of Sky Blue Water
There are a ridiculous amount f ta free English channels on 28E. They have the programming. There are so many channels that aren't carried on any American carrier. How tough would it be for them to uplink lets say to 63w or 58w? That project here that never happened was still a good idea but too raw (and will remain nameless).

I emailed one of the multi channel fta providers over there
If you want to beg them like I did, feel free to do so.
 
Last edited:
They advertise just like we do. They could add North American specific ads if they wanted, charge more for their Euro accounts to be seen on another continent...Just uplink fee and thats it for overhead and double their possible market share. Difference being (from the nameless project) they already have the programming. (Did you you know MTV is FTA in Europe?) I wonder if Charlie and friends are paying them to stay away.
 
Last edited:
In a way they are being paid to stay away. The business model in the US is different than the one in Europe. Your example of MTV is that Dish, Direct and the cable companies are paying for that channel (through the subscriber fees). They go free on some other satellite then they will be dropped by the DTH and cable companies and the fees that MTV gets from these companies will go away along with the ad dollars due to reduced eyeballs.
 
I wish i wouldn't have thought of that. I doubt anything like FTA will ever happen in North America.

google this: echostar agreement non compete

MTV sells advertising, they also charge money to cable and dbs for exclusivity. If they were fta in North America their market share would be huge.

For some reason anti-trust laws seem to get their interpretations dictated by the highest bidding lobbyist. We're paying $70/mo. for what Europe gets for free...were is the free enterprise?
 
Last edited:
TV is not free in Europe. They just have a different fee(tax) structure which eliminates the need for encryption.
 
Magic Static said:
TV is not free in Europe. They just have a different fee(tax) structure which eliminates the need for encryption.

TV is not free in Europe, however channels that are paid for do not get subsidised with advertising. This point is what annoys about the US model, channels sell advertising to raise revenue for the channel, but we have to pay for those channels to be delivered through a provider without an alternative reception method.

Case in point is the much discussed locals, a lot of people get those OTA, the channels are subsidised with advertising but viewers don't pay extra to get them OTA.
 
when i was recently in europe they had advertising on tv. I bet my left nut that the taxes they pay for tv isnt close to $70 month.I would be willing to pay a monthly subscription what they pay in tv tax for the same programming. Our business model sucks, literally. It is a vampiric system that limits choice, free speech and competition. Look at the free programming on 28E and tell me why we can't do that.

I have a friend that circulates around Europe and lives in Germany. I'll ask him how much he has to pay for his free satellite TV. Or how their TV is paid for...what % of his income is tax and how that is broken down...health care TV, government services. I might as well get the straight dope. We did talk about TV and that is why I asked...why- can't we do this? I told him about our situation and he looked at me like I was a caveman.
 
Last edited:
LOL! I would bet you your "left nut" except that I agree with you that $70 a month is a lot of money! The company I hate most is Roger's out of Toronto (no relation to me) because they are making so much money and always going on about how great they are. The free enterprise system reduces competition and increases private profit. It's ironic, and not what the free enterprise propogandists want us to think either.

PS: I don't want your left nut.
 
In north america alot of the channels we watch have been bought up by the providers. Atleast in canada anyways. like natgeo and others that are now owned by shaw media, a subsidiary of shaw communications.

crackt out ,.
 
Most major countries in Europe pay from $100 to $400 a year for a residence that contains a TV. Some tax per TV and some tax you again if you own another home or RV that contains a TV. Spot beams are used to keep other countries from getting free TV.

Television licence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

After reading this you will see that we are a very lucky country to have true free TV.

Go read about the radio, internet and phone taxes over there if you really want to blow your mind. They even tax you if you have a car radio :mad:
 
Most major countries in Europe pay from $100 to $400 a year for a residence that contains a TV. Some tax per TV and some tax you again if you own another home or RV that contains a TV. Spot beams are used to keep other countries from getting free TV.

Television licence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

After reading this you will see that we are a very lucky country to have true free TV.

Go read about the radio, internet and phone taxes over there if you really want to blow your mind. They even tax you if you have a car radio :mad:

Yep...we should just be satisfied we get what we have now......they Don't owe us anything! ;)


.
 
I am English although I now live 50/50 Cyprus EU and US and I agree with Freezy. The EU tv tax (licence some again free) allows many channels to go direct to SES Astra or Eutelsat to broadcast rather than go in with UK Sky package and freeview is great. 26E also has many English channels FTA based on advertising. I think the US packages are a rip off compared to Europe but there the channels are independant to the satellite owners unlike Dish and Echostar which is a monopoly that would not be allowed by law in the EU.
 
Our business model sucks, literally. It is a vampiric system that limits choice, free speech and competition. Look at the free programming on 28E and tell me why we can't do that.
The way I see it, is that in the USA and Canada, after the primary broadcast networks and other local stations, cable TV came before "cable" type channels, and as cable type channels arrived (earlier ones were mostly pay with little advertising), cable providers were the inital and exclusive outlet for them, and becasue of that "cable first" situaton, the cable providers (and by extenson pay satellite providers) set the rules, and have the clout with the smaller cable channels, to tell them what to do, in that if they want to be on cable, part of the deal is they be exclusive to pay providers.

Yes they may have been distributed on satellite or microwave, but at that time, they considered those mediums closed. When home C-band gained critical mass, the major cable channels scrambled to protect the cable exclusivity, and eventually sold C-band subscriptions to home providers.
In Europe, cable TV, at least as non-broadcasts specialty channels, did not exist until the 1990s, when consumer satellite began as well. With that, as cable and home satellite had a parallel emergence, the channels themselves could decide for themseves if they could be FTA on satellite. Of course, a lot of that, at least in the UK, has to to with the TV license paying a lot of the costs stations would otherwise have to bear.
 
What would make me happy is if all the European news channels could be put on one FTA Ku satellite. The other FTA stuff will probably never show up here but the government funded news outlets may listen to us. The BBC news channel and DW-TV would be a good start!
 
I was just reading about Television licenses around the globe. One thing that chaps my nether-parts, is we pay around $70 mo. for satellite ($24.99 introductory rate does not include local programming no extra room fees or HD reception) and we still have to watch commercials. For this same reason we should be able to back charge telemarketers that call your cell phone. Why should I have to pay for them to run their business? Some would say if you don't like it, turn it off the TV and don't own a cell phone...what kind of choice is that?

Nightmare scene, "Sir... we're gonna give it to you, but if you want a lubricant, you will need to provide it for yourself. If you complain...we will label you a commy pinko and kick you out of the Moose Club".

I want an alternative dang it!!! I demand some value!!! I want as many channels as the Arabic speaking people have on fta. Why are English speaking people in North America being persecuted like this!!!!!...lmao
 
Last edited:
"The other FTA stuff will probably never show up here but the government funded news outlets may listen to us. The BBC news channel and DW-TV would be a good start! "

They already broadcast in north america...kinda. PBS at least in the boston area shows over the air BBC, DWTV (European journal which is ok and Journal which is more current news) and NHK material. It's on PBS world.

There is a weird low powered OTA station that is owned by dw (whdn) but it's so low powered I can't receive it.

In all honesty about commercials if you buy a generic recorder you can record things and then skip over them..or put them on pause and skip over them.
 
Status
Please reply by conversation.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts