DISH to partner with Aereo?

[nelson61]

New York Times has a nice article with a picture of the mini antennas. Again, the 50 million viewers that choose not to pay for cable will continue to have plenty of ad supported, free over the air tv no matter what. An advertiser would be a fool to ignore 50 million viewers. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/10/b...g-the-wagons.html?pagewanted=1&ref=technology

 

[sam_gordon]

I can get me locals OTA via DISH now.

Because you're willing and able to put up an antenna. Presumably Aereo subscribers aren't. Did your price for Dish drop because you're using OTA instead of LiL?

Cable companies have bandwidth caps, if they worry about AEREO then they are in violation of their Net Nutrality agreements.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you're trying to say.
My point was some people may consider "cutting the cord", but don't because they don't want (or can't) get OTA reception. Aereo now allows them to get the locals without an antenna at their house. So now they decide they can drop cable/satellite and just watch OTA. THAT'S why I was asking if sat/cablecos should be worried.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

They are willing to put up an Antenna, that's what they are paying Aereo for... to put up and antenna for them.

THe cable companies own the networks, why should they worry?

 

[sam_gordon]

THe cable companies own the networks, why should they worry?

Because only the "big" companies own networks? Like I said, we have over 100 cable providers in our market. TW is the only one that I know that is replicated. Most are "mom & pop" type companies.

 

[Teehar]

I honestly can't understand why anyone would take sides with Fox,Cbs,and Nbc,on this issue.It's pretty cut and dried,it's all about corporate greed.These broadcasters and big cable companies are the very reason things are such a mess now.Meanwhile we all keep paying more.It's got to change,if the broadcasters are too blind to see it,let them fall on their own swords.

 

[sam_gordon]

I honestly can't understand why anyone would take sides with Fox,Cbs,and Nbc,on this issue.It's pretty cut and dried,it's all about corporate greed.These broadcasters and big cable companies are the very reason things are such a mess now.Meanwhile we all keep paying more.It's got to change,if the broadcasters are too blind to see it,let them fall on their own swords.

My only problem with your post is you singling out broadcasters for wanting to make money, when EVERY business wants the same thing. Why aren't you blaming Dish for raising rates? It's OK for Dish to raise fees but not broadcasters?

Another way to look at it... the programming now costs more. Look at how much networks (broadcast and otherwise) pay for sporting events. You think they're just going to eat that additional cost? Of course not. It's going to get passed to the consumer. Whether through advertisers (and then product costs go up) or through retrans fees (and subscriber costs go up). I guess professional athletes & actors should be blamed for wanting more money.

 

[Tampa8]

Sam you make many good points, including in earlier posts in this thread. (Importance of LIL for Satellite as an example)
And as always not only do I have no problem in a company making money, I support the free market for them to do so. And that's where I have the problem. The Networks via the LIL's now have it both ways. I can't choose what LIL I can watch even though the technology is there for it and many would/do pay for it. Yet, they now hold hostage (or try to) the carriers with new fees when satellite is helping them as much as the other way around. Fighting every technology that comes along instead of finding a way to use to their advantage is wearing very thin.

 

[sam_gordon]

Sam you make many good points, including in earlier posts in this thread. (Importance of LIL for Satellite as an example)
And as always not only do I have no problem in a company making money, I support the free market for them to do so. And that's where I have the problem. The Networks via the LIL's now have it both ways. I can't choose what LIL I can watch even though the technology is there for it and many would/do pay for it. Yet, they now hold hostage (or try to) the carriers with new fees when satellite is helping them as much as the other way around. Fighting every technology that comes along instead of finding a way to use to their advantage is wearing very thin.

I agree with you. The whole "out of market" station thing that is presumably law I have no way of knowing how it came about and I have no defense for it. I would also like access to other markets. However, until the law changes, "it is what it is".

I agree fighting Aereo is short sighted. Something else to think about... stations in my market stream their local newscasts. Why don't THEY stream 24/7? They're contractually not allowed. That permission has to come from the program owners (whether network, syndication, or even advertisers).

 

[Tampa8]

I have always wondered that too, about streaming.

 

[sam_gordon]

CBS is now threatening to "plug in the cord"(?)

http://venturebeat.com/2013/04/10/n...come-a-cable-channel-if-aereo-isnt-shut-down/

 

[Tampa8]

I'm more worried they won't make any changes and remain outdated.

 

[Teehar]

My only problem with your post is you singling out broadcasters for wanting to make money, when EVERY business wants the same thing. Why aren't you blaming Dish for raising rates? It's OK for Dish to raise fees but not broadcasters?

Another way to look at it... the programming now costs more. Look at how much networks (broadcast and otherwise) pay for sporting events. You think they're just going to eat that additional cost? Of course not. It's going to get passed to the consumer. Whether through advertisers (and then product costs go up) or through retrans fees (and subscriber costs go up). I guess professional athletes & actors should be blamed for wanting more money.

Let me just say,I'm not a fan of Dish or any other provider constantly raising rates.I'm sure the vast majority of us can agree on that.The problem still lies with the broadcasters and cable networks.They raise rates then naturally the middle man has to raise rates or drop the channels and lose customers.It's a no win situation.

Also,how did these tv and sport contracts get so out of whack?Answer...broadcasters and cable networks bidding ungodly amounts for them.Their motto has always been pass the cost on down to the customer.So far it has made them a lot of money.That motto is obviously not working so well now.Cable and sat subscriber growth is at all time lows.My point being,they better change the motto soon or they will have fewer and fewer eyeballs watching.The tipping point has been reached.

 

[sam_gordon]

Let me just say,I'm not a fan of Dish or any other provider constantly raising rates.I'm sure the vast majority of us can agree on that.The problem still lies with the broadcasters and cable networks.They raise rates then naturally the middle man has to raise rates or drop the channels and lose customers.It's a no win situation.

Also,how did these tv and sport contracts get so out of whack?Answer...broadcasters and cable networks bidding ungodly amounts for them.Their motto has always been pass the cost on down to the customer.So far it has made them a lot of money.That motto is obviously not working so well now.Cable and sat subscriber growth is at all time lows.My point being,they better change the motto soon or they will have fewer and fewer eyeballs watching.The tipping point has been reached.

They wouldn't have to bid "ungodly" amounts if it would have only taken "godly" amounts. When you go buy something... let's say a car, where you negotiate... do you say "I'll give you $10,000 over your asking price!"? Come on. These are businesses. They bid what they think they need to in order to win the bid and not more. The broadcasters & cable networks are "middle men" just as much as Dish, Direct, and cable cos are. They have to pay for their product (plus all the various overhead). If those prices go up, they can either raise their own prices or lose money and close up shop. So THEIR customers now pay more which requires THEIR customers to pay more which requires THEIR customers, etc, etc, etc. THIS is what *I* consider "Trickle Down Economics".

 

[Teehar]

They bid what they think they need to in order to win the bid and not more.

I have to lol at that.Your trying to convince me that none of them overpay,simply because they are frothing at the mouth to have said sport or show?It's not working.

 

[dare2be]

I have to lol at that.Your trying to convince me that none of them overpay,simply because they are frothing at the mouth to have said sport or show?It's not working.

Not only that, they are bidding for exclusive (read monopolistic) control of such product, inflating the price even more. No competition = no price controls.

 

[Tampa8]

I give you exhibit A - Direct TV and Sunday Ticket.

 

[dare2be]

Don't forget that it's laughable to say that the broadcasters and cable networks are just as much of a middleman as Dish or Direct. Most of the networks are owned by conglomerates that also own the majority of the content. So you have oligopolies outbidding each other over monopolistic control.

 

[Stargazer]

What is to stop Directv and Dish Network along with the cable companies from doing the same thing that Aereo is doing? Maybe that is what is frightening the networks. They can setup multiple mini-antennas as well and provide the same thing for their customers except they won't cut the price but just keep the money that they would have had to pay the networks.

 

[mike123abc]

If the networks were to sell a service for lets say $5/month that let me watch any of their shows commercial free via streaming, I would take them up on it.

 

[sam_gordon]

I have to lol at that.Your trying to convince me that none of them overpay,simply because they are frothing at the mouth to have said sport or show?It's not working.

The hate on broadcasters on this site is amazing. If broadcasters cured cancer people on here would complain they didn't do it soon enough.

Would you pay more than was needed for an item? There's a car you really, really, really want. You know it's worth $50K, but "just to make sure you get it", you offer $75K. That sounds reasonable? That's what you're accusing networks of doing.

We're talking businesses here. Just because YOU (even 'general') don't think a sports contract is worth (insert price here) doesn't mean you're right.

Why are tickets to major sporting events going up astronomically? I guess that's because people are willing to pay more, not because the arenas are asking for more?

ETA: I don't think everything broadcasters/networks do is correct. I don't think they always make the right decisions. However, I also don't think cable/satcos automatically make the wrong decision because I disagree with them. Put yourself in the role of a network executive. YOUR livelihood is now dependent on the network making as much money as it can. Try to see things from others' point of view.