Dish talks about programming costs

jimdandyvi

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 19, 2010
496
0
Virgin Islands
No talk about sports which is the most costly programming. He main point was that most subscribers want a single bill. I feel that this is less important than offering a deal when you take multiple services. That is what the cable companies are doing with the triple play for three services. By Dish not offering internet service, which has an 80% gross profit margin, it makes it much more difficult to offer substantial discounts on video services and movies which at best have a 50% margin.

Also with an internet business ISP you have little or know content to pay for so you aren't fighting with greedy sports leagues and movie moguls.
 

Scherrman

SatelliteGuys Master
Supporting Founder
Mar 14, 2008
15,555
9,929
Eastern Iowa
Dish is positioning itself to be able to provide all three though. I believe they will be in a great position in the near future with all the acquisitions they've been making.
 

rufwork

SatelliteGuys Family
Jul 12, 2010
102
0
Southeast US
Wish he'd talked about the HD vs. SD costs and why channels will even let them broadcast SD-only.

Also not excited about paying for others' on-demand viewing if I'm not, which he seemed to imply would happen.

But yeah, not the best interviewer there.
 

yaz96

Baby, It's Cold Outside
Dec 22, 2005
12,829
1
Front Range, Colorado
We've seen the losses of video subs from all providers recently. The programmers had better take note of that, as Laddy says, at some point people will just stop subscribing, and the revenue will really drop.
 

jimdandyvi

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 19, 2010
496
0
Virgin Islands
I don't think they will have the backbone to haul all the traffic like AT&T or Comcast. Satellite and/or 4G just don't have the capacity of fiber optic networks.

Dish will also be at a cost disadvantage in that they will have to maintain dual delivery networks, both a terrestrial and a satellite while all Comcast or AT&T have is a single network to deliver three services. Dish can't abandon satellite delivery of its video programming as many of its current subs are off the grid so to speak and have satellite as it is the only way to receive broadband video services.

Video services are not that that profitable. To much competition and the programming suppliers are skimming off the cream. The reduced profitability of video broadband is why Time Warner announced this week that they are going to concentrate on the data side of their business.
 

Slamminc11

Pub Member / Supporter
Jan 28, 2005
4,174
236
Please elaborate.

well, out of all of the companies in the United States that have fiber optic Networks, Dish/Echo have put together enough fiber optics to have the largest network of all those companies! :neener :D ;)
WE'RE #1! WE'RE #1!
 

stardust3

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Mar 7, 2006
8,420
6,417
.....
I am hearing rumors through a third party that is getting their info from Wildblue & Hughesnet reps directly tied to this persons business. They're saying big things about satellite internet becoming a major competitor in the internet world. 12 meg speeds that will 100% handle voip & online gaming without lag. BS or fact, who knows, time will tell. I personally don't believe Dish would have purchased Hughes if they did not have a viable plan and future business model. The satellite industry is boring & dead right now. There needs to be some serious breakthroughs in technology & the way services are delivered. The only thing I fear is 1 company having the market cornered & us the end consumer having to pay whatever they feel like charging us.
 

amoni

SatelliteGuys Family
Jun 13, 2004
90
0
"12 meg speeds that will 100% handle voip & online gaming without lag"

Yeah on a clear day you can see forever however on a cloudy day...
 

JerseyMatt

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 17, 2010
1,193
0
Midwest
Physics says you can't not have lag on a satellite connection. The round trip earth-orbit-earth bounce alone (23,000 miles x4) puts over 500mS into the equation. Then whatever it takes once it's into the wireline (could be 50 or 500mS or more in total), depending on the route and traffic. Sorry, that claim is just a flat out lie.
 

Sean Mota

SatelliteGuys Master
Supporting Founder
Sep 8, 2003
19,039
1,738
New York City
The problem with programming high cost is that consumers are never satisfied with one level of channels. The minute a new channel is announced you see this board with questions when it is going to be available. Look at the local channels sports. I live in ny and do not miss Yes, Sny or Mlb. I am a baseball fan. But how much baseaball can I watch over a baseball season. I can to the conclusion that I had enough baseaball with espn or fox or tbs. And you know what I dont watch those channels very much. There is enough media out there besides tv where I can get all the information I need. We get played by the programmers into paying for channels we do not watch. There is a bunch of channels that I wish I could drop and save money. The current structure makes it impossible. It is a supply and demand problem. As long as we keep asking for useless channels, we will keep paying more and more. I wish that the gov and look how big of a scam this is. Starting with hollywood.

Sent from my LG-P999 using SatelliteGuys
 

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

Top