Cuban and Voom -- Why Cuban is happy to see Voom go bye-bye?

S

slocoma

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 22, 2004
156
0
"I also have a vested interested in seeing the adoption of HDTV not happening too quickly. The fact that it has taken all these years to get this far is a beautiful thing. The conventional wisdom among cable networks is that the market of HDTV consumers is still too small for them to cost justify investing in new content, equipment and distribution, which for the biggest network conglomerates will reach hundreds of millions of dollars in conversion costs, incremental equipment and distribution costs. The bigger the perceived cost for them, the slower they move, the less the competition for HDNet and HDNet Movies."

posted by Cuban himself on www.blogmaverick.com
 
RocketRay

RocketRay

SatelliteGuys Family
Oct 28, 2004
40
0
SoCal
At least he's being honest. He wants to be a monopoly and competition from Voom was a threat.

Far more disturbing is what he says below, about supporting the auctioning off of the analog spectrum. It'll lead to the "Clear Channel"ling of OTA television, lack of competition, and in general crap on "free" TV. Although I'm sure they'll find a way to make us pay for even that.
 
S

Sean Mota

SatelliteGuys Master
Supporting Founder
Sep 8, 2003
19,039
1,738
New York City
Problem is that the HD Content is not going away. He still may have to fight if VOOM21 gets into cable and dbs distribution. I can see three HD distribution channels fighting for HD content:

Hdnet (cuban)
INHD (Cableguys)
VOOM21 (Rainbow/Dolan)
 
Bruce

Bruce

That is my dog Bender.
Supporting Founder
Nov 29, 2003
6,713
6,779
Sean Mota said:
Problem is that the HD Content is not going away. He still may have to fight if VOOM21 gets into cable and dbs distribution. I can see three HD distribution channels fighting for HD content:

Hdnet (cuban)
INHD (Cableguys)
VOOM21 (Rainbow/Dolan)


Well, the main advantage Cuban has is he only charges $1.10 per sub for both channels, InHD wanted about $3.34 per sub from Voom ( and I would believe from all DBS providers ), so Cuban can get more of a foothold with the other Cable companies based on price.
 
BFG

BFG

SatelliteGuys Master
Supporting Founder
Mar 2, 2004
8,207
0
Orlando
Yeah but the voom channels are even better. They pay you to carry them :D
 
S

Sean Mota

SatelliteGuys Master
Supporting Founder
Sep 8, 2003
19,039
1,738
New York City
bruce said:
Well, the main advantage Cuban has is he only charges $1.10 per sub for both channels, InHD wanted about $3.34 per sub from Voom ( and I would believe from all DBS providers ), so Cuban can get more of a foothold with the other Cable companies based on price.

The problem with INHD is that although they state that they are available, they will make it impossible to find a distribution outlet with any DBS providers unless the DBS providers are willing to pay their price. INHD was created with one purpose... Let it be on "Cable ONLY" so that Cable has a competitive advantage over DBS (and HDnet). INHD can say all they want about being available but I will be shocked if they ever are unless DBS providers sucked up to their demand. Why do you think HDnet sees INHD as the enemy?

VOOM21 can make a nice package of channels that will compete against INHD and HDnet very nicely. For example, let me give you the BIKINI DESTINATION program on HDnet. That program I could only watch ONCE. It is a dumb half hour in front of TV watching models show up their little bit of skin (if you like it). After two episodes of the same it becomes boring because there is no substance in the half hour except for the bikini model. I could watch the same on PlayboyHD and get the rest of it if I need that. I still say that PlayboyHD also is a dumb channel because it does not go beyond a certain point. I need something more interested than that.

Again there's good HD content on all of them and it will probably find a good audience depending on what you are looking for. I am sure that VOOM21 (for a lack of a better name) can make two channels like INHD and HDnets with the content that they already have. And I do not believe, BFG, that they will have to pay to get on the distribution list. Right now, either D* or E* will be stupid to pass on them and let Cable get them.
 
G

gutter

SatelliteGuys Pro
Supporting Founder
May 26, 2004
1,510
0
I still say that PlayboyHD also is a dumb channel because it does not go beyond a certain point. I need something more interested than that. .[/QUOTE said:
Sean has given a new meaning to HD. He wants HarD core. :D
 
S

Sean Mota

SatelliteGuys Master
Supporting Founder
Sep 8, 2003
19,039
1,738
New York City
gutter said:
Sean has give a new meaning to HD. He wants HarD core. :D

There's one already but it can't find distribution in the USA. Hustler-HD!!! :D
 
L

lostcause

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 22, 2004
496
0
Talk about flashbacks. Off topic but you just reminded me of something. does anyone remember a service/channel called On TV from many many years back?
 
Jamey K

Jamey K

Recovering Voomer
Supporting Founder
Feb 16, 2005
2,627
3
West Texas
Sean Mota said:
There's one already but it can't find distribution in the USA. Hustler-HD!!! :D

Good lord...can you imagine? I think you've found the one channel that doesn't need to be HD. Something like that would be for gynecologists.
 
cr0mag

cr0mag

SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 22, 2004
414
0
New Orleans, LA
I dunno.... I rember when people were flocking to buy new computers just for internet porn... This could spur on the sales of HD televisions even more... (Especially now that you can buy one at W* Mart)! :) :) :)
Anything that drives tv sales is good for us all, because that will drive more content. (And personally, I wouldn't complain about Hustler HD) :cool:
 
NightRyder

NightRyder

1978 Y88 T/A 6.6 4 spd 1978-2020 RIP
Supporting Founder
Sep 9, 2003
3,545
8
NW Oregon
There are some things better left unseen. :eek: Even DVD provides too much detail sometimes. ;)


NightRyder
 
L

leaderc

Active SatelliteGuys Member
Nov 5, 2004
22
0
I remember On TV, circa 1981. I remember you could get illegal boxes for it on just about every streetcorner too....
 
CWS_kahuna

CWS_kahuna

SatelliteGuys Pro
Supporting Founder
Jul 21, 2004
513
0
California
Not to defend what Mark was saying about the adoption pace of HD but from his buisness vested point of view it certainly makes sense for HDnet. The more HD channels out there means the less people will watch his channels.

Now on the other side of that is this, if more & more channels get released, hopefully more & more people will sign up for HD content which means more people that can watch his channel.

___

As for a Voom21 or whatever it might be called if something like that does happen. I really think they can have more than 2 channels like HDnet or INhd, I can see Monsters HD being stand alone, Rush HD, Rave HD, and maybe a few others + having maybe 2 channels with all the rest of their stuff. Throwing 21 channels into 2 would certainly be difficult but maybe 5 - 10 channels would be perfect, if they were looking to downsize the number of channels from 21 that is. All in all though even if they only had 1 channel it would certainly be a welcome addition if D* & E* were to add it.

___

Well, the main advantage Cuban has is he only charges $1.10 per sub for both channels, InHD wanted about $3.34 per sub from Voom ( and I would believe from all DBS providers ), so Cuban can get more of a foothold with the other Cable companies based on price.

Are those prices for real? InHD is certainly asking a lot, I wonder how much they are charging Cable customers for it?
 
W

wase4711

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jul 22, 2004
685
0
Outside Chicago
lostcause said:
Talk about flashbacks. Off topic but you just reminded me of something. does anyone remember a service/channel called On TV from many many years back?

Yes, I remember it well..and, you are showing your age!!!
 
1080iBeVuMin

1080iBeVuMin

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 29, 2004
915
0
Santa Rosa, CA
leaderc said:
I remember On TV, circa 1981. I remember you could get illegal boxes for it on just about every streetcorner too....
I remember On TV from the 70s in the Los Angeles area. It was OTA subscription TV, back when people said "Pay TV?" Who is going to pay for TV?
 
Tvlman

Tvlman

SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 29, 2004
817
0
Surf City.CA
I find the HDNET content not as good as a couple of years ago. There are so many "Dallas" oriented programs that if you don't live there a lot of them don't make sense. I notice that UHD has pre-empted a lot of the failed series that otherwise Cuban would be showing. Let's face it. He created 2 HD channels and is crowing like he invented the wheel. Charlie Dolan put up an entire concept of 21 Original HD channels and was about 10 years ahead of his time. That means we'll see a VOOM-like HDTV market in the year..........2012! See you then.
 

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

Top