" the wheels are falling off of satellite TV"

[bobvick]

Yes me too. But I think that boat has sailed . DISH doesn’t seem to care anymore about replacing the SD channel with an HD version. Must cost too much for the HD version.

What about AHC and UP TV? Plus, remember TV Land is a Viacom network, the ratings for Viacom channels haven’t exactly been on fire. As a matter of fact I was reading the other day that Charter and Viacom were on the verge of a dispute over the carriage fees and low(er) viewership.

 

[Pepper]

Don't get me started...too late.

The movie studios killed 3D for home use, and they did it because of greed, stupidity, or combination of both.

1. Release 2D Blu-ray and DVD on the same day. Wait weeks/months/years before releasing in 3D.
2. Don't give people who already bought the 2D an option to upgrade. Put the 3D in "special edition" packs containing 2D Blu-ray and DVD copies, so anybody who bought the 2D version to see it in a timely manner ends up buying all the same stuff again, plus a single 3D disc.
3. For good measure, make those "special editions" exclusive to one or two retailers and raise the price to reflect their rarity.
4. After the inevitable collapse of demand caused by 1, 2 and 3, all TV manufacturers stop making 3D sets available to US consumers.
5. Stop releasing 3D at all in US. Force people who want it to hunt down grey-market imported discs such as my UK Beauty and Beast (2017) 3D.

I thought all that was bad enough and then I read some technical details. A little known fact is that there is no real requirement that a 3D Blu-ray disc be played on a 3D player. If mastered correctly, the same disc can play the movie in either 3D or 2D on a 3D player, or 2D on non-3D player. That popup message saying this disc requires a 3D player and TV is an artificial restriction for the sole purpose of selling more discs.

If the studios wanted 3D to succeed, they could have made their mass-market packages a 3D/2D Blu-ray and DVD bundle as before. Anyone who bought Blu-ray discs would not have to buy new ones if they got a 3D TV and 3D player.

 

[Claude Greiner]

The wheels are definitely falling off. Been seeing this trend for the past 3-4 years as everything goes to streaming.

The whole key to keeping video subscribers is good, fast, cheap internet access.

You see AT&T rolling out fiber and improving their current internet infrastructure every day because they see the writing in on the wall.

Dish on the other hand is going to have major issues as they are NOT a true ISP. Hughesnet does not count.

As broadband becomes available more and more and becomes available in every home in America like traditional phone service, your going to see a shift from traditional tv to internet based Tv.

As broadband speeds become faster, the new Tv will simply be a provider sending you a set top box you plug into your internet connection and it will work like any other cable or satellite provider.

As everything goes to streaming, you will see more alacarte.

The first victim of all this will be ESPN as they are guaranteed to loose market share as not everyone cares to watch ESPN or be forced to pay for it.

I would rather have a regional sports network than ESPN.

Only time I watch ESPN is for their game of the week if my team is playing.

 

[comfortably_numb]

The wheels are definitely falling off. Been seeing this trend for the past 3-4 years as everything goes to streaming.

The whole key to keeping video subscribers is good, fast, cheap internet access.

You see AT&T rolling out fiber and improving their current internet infrastructure every day because they see the writing in on the wall.

Dish on the other hand is going to have major issues as they are NOT a true ISP. Hughesnet does not count.

As broadband becomes available more and more and becomes available in every home in America like traditional phone service, your going to see a shift from traditional tv to internet based Tv.

As broadband speeds become faster, the new Tv will simply be a provider sending you a set top box you plug into your internet connection and it will work like any other cable or satellite provider.

As everything goes to streaming, you will see more alacarte.

The first victim of all this will be ESPN as they are guaranteed to loose market share as not everyone cares to watch ESPN or be forced to pay for it.

I would rather have a regional sports network than ESPN.

Only time I watch ESPN is for their game of the week if my team is playing.

Maybe in cities, but rural areas will still depend on satellite for years to come. IP delivery is great where there is internet access. People tend to forget about us rural folk, but we’re still here.

We are a LONG way from having “broadband in every home in America,” let alone broadband that is fast enough and without the caps imposed, to be able to stream HD video all the time.

 

[KAB]

Maybe in cities, but rural areas will still depend on satellite for years to come. IP delivery is great where there is internet access. People tend to forget about us rural folk, but we’re still here.

We are a LONG way from having “broadband in every home in America,” let alone broadband that is fast enough and without the caps imposed, to be able to stream HD video all the time.

I have friend who is heavily invested in Fixed Location internet in Tenn. They best they can deliver is about 3mmps at best...and they charge $60 per month for that. He's a very smart man, but I can't fathom how he thinks he can grow that. We don't talk business much...just drink beer and howl at the moon!

 

[comfortably_numb]

I have friend who is heavily invested in Fixed Location internet in Tenn. They best they can deliver is about 3mmps at best...and they charge $60 per month for that. He's a very smart man, but I can't fathom how he thinks he can grow that. We don't talk business much...just drink beer and howl at the moon!

Yeah, that doesn’t seem sustainable! Heck, unlimited 3G hotspots (up to 3mbps) for $5/month can be found on Ebay. $60 seems high, but maybe if there isn’t any competition..

 

[KAB]

Yeah, that doesn’t seem sustainable! Heck, unlimited 3G hotspots (up to 3mbps) for $5/month can be found on Ebay. $60 seems high, but maybe if there isn’t any competition..

Keep in mind he is in eastern farm-belt Tenn.

 

[mwdxer1]

I do both, stream and have Dish and also OTA. I will not cord-cut here as our internet is not always available. We get short periods of loss. Sometimes for a few minutes up to several hours on the rare occasion. Plus DVRing streaming is not as easy as adding an HDD on the vip211k. I do have many of the apps on the Roku for free since I have the channel on Dish. The On Demand on apps like Starz & HBO are great. Not all OTA stations stream on Sling or other carriers either. So we have some way to go. Add to that many channels Dish has are not available streaming and vise versa.

 

[Juan]

Don't get me started...too late.

The movie studios killed 3D for home use, and they did it because of greed, stupidity, or combination of both.

1. Release 2D Blu-ray and DVD on the same day. Wait weeks/months/years before releasing in 3D.
2. Don't give people who already bought the 2D an option to upgrade. Put the 3D in "special edition" packs containing 2D Blu-ray and DVD copies, so anybody who bought the 2D version to see it in a timely manner ends up buying all the same stuff again, plus a single 3D disc.
3. For good measure, make those "special editions" exclusive to one or two retailers and raise the price to reflect their rarity.
4. After the inevitable collapse of demand caused by 1, 2 and 3, all TV manufacturers stop making 3D sets available to US consumers.
5. Stop releasing 3D at all in US. Force people who want it to hunt down grey-market imported discs such as my UK Beauty and Beast (2017) 3D.

I thought all that was bad enough and then I read some technical details. A little known fact is that there is no real requirement that a 3D Blu-ray disc be played on a 3D player. If mastered correctly, the same disc can play the movie in either 3D or 2D on a 3D player, or 2D on non-3D player. That popup message saying this disc requires a 3D player and TV is an artificial restriction for the sole purpose of selling more discs.

If the studios wanted 3D to succeed, they could have made their mass-market packages a 3D/2D Blu-ray and DVD bundle as before. Anyone who bought Blu-ray discs would not have to buy new ones if they got a 3D TV and 3D player.

The truth is consumers don't really like 3d that much..it was over exposed in movie theaters...it would have been great for sports tho

 

[camo]

The truth is consumers don't really like 3d that much..it was over exposed in movie theaters...it would have been great for sports tho

I was thinking the same.

 

[patmurphey]

The wheels are definitely falling off. Been seeing this trend for the past 3-4 years as everything goes to streaming.

The whole key to keeping video subscribers is good, fast, cheap internet access.

You see AT&T rolling out fiber and improving their current internet infrastructure every day because they see the writing in on the wall.

Dish on the other hand is going to have major issues as they are NOT a true ISP. Hughesnet does not count.

As broadband becomes available more and more and becomes available in every home in America like traditional phone service, your going to see a shift from traditional tv to internet based Tv.

As broadband speeds become faster, the new Tv will simply be a provider sending you a set top box you plug into your internet connection and it will work like any other cable or satellite provider.

As everything goes to streaming, you will see more alacarte.

The first victim of all this will be ESPN as they are guaranteed to loose market share as not everyone cares to watch ESPN or be forced to pay for it.

I would rather have a regional sports network than ESPN.

Only time I watch ESPN is for their game of the week if my team is playing.

And, when it's done I'll bet that you will be paying more for fewer channels or programming.

 

[Pepper]

The truth is consumers don't really like 3d that much..it was over exposed in movie theaters...it would have been great for sports tho

Unfortunately we'll never know whether that's true or not. The way the content owners treated their 3D content (see my points above) guaranteed that it would never be mainstream. Only dedicated fans and collectors will buy a 3D release at full price, when the standard Blu-Ray has been in the discount bin for the past year. Only dedicated fans and collectors will hunt down the exclusive edition at that one retailer, or buy an imported copy from overseas because it was never released here.

Imagine how popular the format could have been if the studios had gotten behind it. Suppose that for every movie that was 3D in theatres, when it was time to release the Blu-Ray and DVD, that every Blu-Ray was a 3D Blu-Ray that would also play in 2D on non-3D equipment, instead of 3D being an afterthought for a hefty additional cost to the consumer. There would be no separate "Avatar 3D" in that case. Just "Avatar" that plays in 3D on 3D equipment, and plays in 2D otherwise.

 

[Pepper]

And, when it's done I'll bet that you will be paying more for fewer channels or programming.

More on a per-channel basis maybe. What I want is to pay less total, for a very small number of channels, the ones I actually watch. I don't care if the cost per channel is higher if the total is less and I still see the same things I want to see. Flex is closer to that goal than I've ever had before, but still a lot of bundled junk.

 

[ncted]

I know several people who love 3D at home. That said, most people I know found it to be a failed strategy to get people to buy more expensive TVs. I think UHD will be more successful in that respect, but how much resolution do we really need?

 

[Scherrman]

Maybe in cities, but rural areas will still depend on satellite for years to come. IP delivery is great where there is internet access. People tend to forget about us rural folk, but we’re still here.

We are a LONG way from having “broadband in every home in America,” let alone broadband that is fast enough and without the caps imposed, to be able to stream HD video all the time.

Not only that but as more and more people switch to streaming the more the costs will go up. In a few years people will find they are getting less for close to the same amount of money.

 

[Bobby]

Not only that but as more and more people switch to streaming the more the costs will go up. In a few years people will find they are getting less for close to the same amount of money.

The naysayers to your post remind me of an old Styx song....

 

[eddie willers]

Maybe in cities, but rural areas will still depend on satellite for years to come. IP delivery is great where there is internet access. People tend to forget about us rural folk, but we’re still here.

We are a LONG way from having “broadband in every home in America,” let alone broadband that is fast enough and without the caps imposed, to be able to stream HD video all the time.

If OneWeb and SpaceX are successful, your wait may be as little as two years. And they'll spark a price war with the current ISPs to boot.

With latency as low as 25ms, SpaceX to launch broadband satellites in 2019

Low-latency satellite broadband gets approval to serve US residents

 

[mdram]

how will they ever get 25ms from a sat?

 

[ncted]

how will they ever get 25ms from a sat?

By putting the sats in very low orbits. I still think 25ms is the lowest they can go. I wouldn't expect it to be that low consistently, but time will tell.

 

[dare2be]

I still don't understand how feasible LEO satellites would be. Just how many would have to be launched to provide consistent coverage, since a vast majority of the time a single satellite won't even be over the US?