Dish Sets Stage for DirecTV Merger with Transfer of Satellites

[MikeD-C05]

If Sirius and XM had not merged, I don't think either of them would be with us today. At best, Sirius might have survived. Barely.

I like satellite radio. But not so much as to pay what they want for it.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

The only reason why I have Xm to this day, is because they give me the 5 months for $25.00 deal-so I won't cancel ,which works out to $5.00 a month. I can afford $5.00 a month but I will not pay full price at all. It isn't worth it.

 

[TheForce]

Sirrus XM is a bad example. They were not able to demonstrate that separate they would be able to come up with a profitable enterprise. What probably would have happened in the long run is that one or the other would have gone bankrupt, leaving the other one to succeed and be a monopoly anyways.

Dish and DIRECTV are both profitable now. When the first merge attempt happened I believe Dish was slightly profitable and DIRECTV was still showing large losses, and then it was still rejected. Now they are both successful and a 3 way competition between cable/Dish/DIRECTV is working (as well as it can given the content providers).

Also, in recent years, DTV has been buying back their stock as their money management while Dish has been growing the company. One is becoming a bigger more diversified operation while the other, DTV, is going private. If DTV ever goes 100% private, you will see Dish swallow it up and then Dish will continue to jack up subscriber prices.

The future of subscriber viewing is not satellite or cable, it's internet TV. I see this all boiling down to a utility company that runs wifi, and the internet. Local TV will remain using a broadcast signal but few will use it. Most will be on wifi or cell phone LTE for internet, plus local broadcast VHF / UHF Satellite will become obsolete as too costly to maintain.

 

[odbrv]

The future of subscriber viewing is not satellite or cable, it's internet TV. I see this all boiling down to a utility company that runs wifi, and the internet. Local TV will remain using a broadcast signal but few will use it. Most will be on wifi or cell phone LTE for internet, plus local broadcast VHF / UHF Satellite will become obsolete as too costly to maintain.

I totally agree. The cable merger and satellite merger need to take place so that in 10 years the combined companies will be about the same size as one is now.

 

[oldengineer]

The future of subscriber viewing is not satellite or cable, it's internet TV. I see this all boiling down to a utility company that runs wifi, and the internet. Local TV will remain using a broadcast signal but few will use it. Most will be on wifi or cell phone LTE for internet, plus local broadcast VHF / UHF Satellite will become obsolete as too costly to maintain.

A few years ago Pennsylvania Power and Lighting started a pilot program for broadband over power lines. They gave up after a short trial because of technical difficulties. A friend in England was working on a BBoPL modem and they started a trial program but have also given up. Too bad, it would have been good competition for cable and telephone line providers. I can't ever get DSL or AT&T where I live because I'm too far from my Central Office.

 

[foghorn2]

I'm for a merger if the name is still Dish, Charles in Charge and Dish equipment/tech prevails. directv- forget it, will go back to telco/cable.

 

[Stargazer]

If there is a Dish/Direct merger, Charlie is going to want his equipment to be used. He owns Echostar which manufacturer's Dish Network equipment. He will also want his satellites to be used.

I used to think a merger would be great but this was before near everybody got their local channels. Now things have improved greatly and I wonder what the real advantage to the consumer would be? It seems like mainly an advantage for the companies. For one, people would not be able to switch back and forth between providers if there were only one. Two, there would be less competition so probably fewer promotions. There should be stipulations if such an agreement is allowed such as affordable broadband everywhere by cell tower by a certain date which would allow for triple play offerings. I'm surprised Charlie has not invested in LEO satellites as a way to provide broadband and internet.

 

[Hall]

For consumers, one argument would be that the combined company would have better "buying power" for negotiating pricing with the networks. That certainly doesn't mean that they'll pass that savings on to the customer though !