Dish Anywhere and the Roku

[ChadT41]

Look at it this way. You take a company like Dish, who made a couple Billion last year. They only made a few hundred million net on that. Huge difference. If you think HULU is any different you are crazy. And I have said this about OTT for awhile now. You get companies like HULU and Netflix that offer this product cheap now, but the day that channels start losing money, is the day your pricing starts to sky rocket. Dish was really cheap once too, as a better cost provider to cable. The first step has already been taken, when the FCC decided to change the meaning of MVPD so it included OTT such as Netflix. It is suppose to be supplemental to cable and satellite. Once primary mainstream,... It will all be over and the cycle will start again.

Back on topic though, FXNow may love it. But will they love it when Ergen or ATT or Comcast say "your channel has been devalued, we are going to pay a lot less because we cannot profit as much from it"?

 

[Bruce]

Remember, it cost money to run a business.... It ain't all profit....

Duh, that has nothing to do with what I posted, this is all about future potential in these apps for revenue for content providers, Hulu shows that potential is there, if they can attract that much ad money for a app channel that pretty much has shows on it that we already get on our cable/ sat service is pretty amazing.

 

[Bruce]

Back on topic though, FXNow may love it. But will they love it when Ergen or ATT or Comcast say "your channel has been devalued, we are going to pay a lot less because we cannot profit as much from it"?

Well, with Dish you cannot get access to it, ATT/DirecTV and Comcast you can and why would it be devalued, you still have to be a cable/Sat subscriber to get it, if they sold it like HBO Now maybe but that is no what I was at first writing about which was if they were more channel apps you could drop the extra boxes.

 

[ChadT41]

Because they can drop the boxes, thus the provider is losing revenue because the app will take over. That devalues it for the provider. Aka not worth as much to them to profit off of.

 

[DishSubLA]

sremick, that's what SLINGBOXES are for!

 

[pattykay]

Because they can drop the boxes, thus the provider is losing revenue because the app will take over. That devalues it for the provider. Aka not worth as much to them to profit off of.

Subscribers would still need the boxes for all of the other channels that do not yet have apps. Besides, it would be kind of hard to point to any individual channel, or even any major channel group, as being the reason for subscribers dropping their extra boxes. Dish and their ridiculous additional receiver fees would seem to be a much more likely culprit.

 

[Micallen]

Subscribers would still need the boxes for all of the other channels that do not yet have apps. Besides, it would be kind of hard to point to any individual channel, or even any major channel group, as being the reason for subscribers dropping their extra boxes. Dish and their ridiculous additional receiver fees would seem to be a much more likely culprit.

I don't know... If I could get ESPN & ESPN2 in my shop, I wouldn't need a box.

 

[ChadT41]

Subscribers would still need the boxes for all of the other channels that do not yet have apps. Besides, it would be kind of hard to point to any individual channel, or even any major channel group, as being the reason for subscribers dropping their extra boxes. Dish and their ridiculous additional receiver fees would seem to be a much more likely culprit.

The receiver fees is the point. If someone can get the majority of channels they want on ROKU for free with their Dish or DTV subscription, Dish and DTV will make less money on receiver fees. That means those channels devalue themselves since Dish cannot profit from them, nearly as much. It's lost revenue and in order to make it worth it, the channels have to lower their costs to make all parties happy, but you know they won't do that either. Thus, no ROKU for Dish. If customers want to not have receiver fees and have the option to use a ROKU for their service, Dish gives them an option. SlingTV.

 

[pattykay]

The receiver fees is the point. If someone can get the majority of channels they want on ROKU for free with their Dish or DTV subscription, Dish and DTV will make less money on receiver fees. That means those channels devalue themselves since Dish cannot profit from them, nearly as much. It's lost revenue and in order to make it worth it, the channels have to lower their costs to make all parties happy, but you know they won't do that either. Thus, no ROKU for Dish. If customers want to not have receiver fees and have the option to use a ROKU for their service, Dish gives them an option. SlingTV.

My point was: how would Dish know which channels caused how many subscribers to drop their additional boxes so they could calculate the "devaluation?"

 

[ChadT41]

Anyone that offered it on the ROKU via dish would be a good start.