EchoStar Chief Says Satellite Deal Will Move Forward
- Thread starter Bruce
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 72
- Views 8K
dragon002 said:
The government isn't forcing you to buy a new digital TV set to make 50k people happy. That's just a really warped interpretation of the facts. DBS is a digital signal you can watch on your analog set. See how that STB thing works? What makes you think there won't be STBs specifically to prevent older analog sets from being obsoleted?
The gov't wants the analog spectrum returned so it can be used for other communication services and portions will be auctioned with estimates of $20B-$100B proceeds to come from those auctions. That's not chump change. Not to mention the wirelss industry possibilities and potential jobs creation that could spring up from those auctions. The broadcasters were given digital spectrum with the understanding they would return the analog spectrum. They have a legal and moral obligation to do so and they are dragging their feet.
There's a bigger picture here and it has nothing to do with forcing you to do anything.
For those on cable the digital analog issue is a non issue for analog sets. For those that only get their TV via OTA, the FCC is looking at the Berlin, Germany model. There the government subsidized decoders for those who only had access to an analog signal. Cable already can take the digital and convert it to analog which happens now.
Stop picking on Bruce, Dragon. The notion that the FCC might veto the deal has nothing to do with digital mandates not being HD mandates. It has to do with them wanting more than 2 sat providers.
not picking on anyone. if the fcc was so concerned , as you believe, about having 3 sat providers, why then did they allow directv to takeover primestar and its 3.7 million subs????
and guess what , tci was the majority owner of primestar and mr malone engineered the sale to hughes. maybe some writing on the wall???
just a thought.
and guess what , tci was the majority owner of primestar and mr malone engineered the sale to hughes. maybe some writing on the wall???
just a thought.
dragon002 said:
OK, if you say so. Nobody here will argue with you.
The gov. is not mandating HDTV, they are mandating conversion to digital signal which you can still watch on your $39 WalMart TV by using a converter box. They are not doing this for 50,00 HDTV owners. It is being done because bandwidth is a limited commodity (has to do with those danged laws of physics). Digital signal provides a much more efficient use of that bandwidth which is allocated by a governemnt agency. Everyone benefits as even OTA users can now receive 4x as many channels than before with a picture which you can actually watch without needing cable, sat, etc. Yes, some things that the government tries to do actually make sense.
cfarm said:
first off it isn't a STB, that is a CABLE term, it is an IRD in DBS terms.i understand the reasoning behind the gov wanting the switch to DIGITAL transmissions. i know about the spectrum auction etc.
i was replying to the poster that is continually saying that the feds should stop the sat sale to ergen because it will supposedly deprive people of HDTV, the feds did NOT mandate HDTV it mandated DIGITAL. and between directv and dish there are 850,000 subs enjoying HD and growing every day. there is no reason for the feds to some how shield or protect one provider over another, that is not the govs job.
i am not known as a nasty person, but some of you on this forum????? the first time someone posts something that you don't agree with you attack and name call.
good lord, if old man dolan should die tonite, there would be all kind of kook conspiracy posts from james had him killed to he is in hiding developing a way to eliminate the sats and irds and transmit directly into your brain thru a vulcan mind meld!!!!!!
dragon
dragon002 said:
STB is a generic term in my world. I'm not all that anal about it.
Well, there you are wrong. Part of the government's job is to protect the consumer by preventing monopolistic forces in the marketplace. More to the point here, you might want to read this rather recent FCC report:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-271A1.pdf
Note this quote in particular; "Specifically, any licensee currently operating satellites at orbit locations capable of providing DBS service to the 50 U.S. states will be prohibited from acquiring, owning, or controlling this license for a period beginning with the release date of this Order and ending four years after the award of the initial license. We conclude that such a restriction on eligibility for this license will serve the public interest by helping to promote the development of an additional provider of DBS services."
I think that spells is out pretty clear for anyone wondering about the FCC mindset. I don't think the approval for license transfers is a rubber stamp certainty by any means. Dish may end up with a satellite and uplink facility, but no additional licenses from this deal.
Just because someone doesn't agree with your interpretation doesn't mean you're being attacked. We've already got a "poor, poor me" member. The position has been filled, so please just offer your opinions without the need to complain when not everyone agrees with them.
cfarm said:
cfarm, a monopoly would be one provider, there are two major dbs operators, enough said.
also when some one disagrees with you guys opines , they should be given the same latitude, oh poor poor us , they are taking our voom away!!!! or they are selling our satellite to that evil ergen. or that evil murdock, look at the BILLIONS he is spending on the non existent spaceway sats. the feds should at least force the other dbs operators to provide us our voom!! take that spaceway sat that is on sea launch and give it to dolan sr so he can be a visionary .
get a life
dolan will try and then directv and dish will swoop in for the kill
dragon
dragon002 said:
Duopolies are strongly disfavored under antitrust law (Heinz Baby Food case). The FCC will most likely deny the license transfer if Voom still exists according to the policy set forth in the DBS auction order. Without the license, the deal for the satellite terminates.
joe,
first thank you for not ranting. i appreciate it, really!
these people are trying to save HDTV by using the digital and monopoly argument, HDTV is not on the fcc screen and they are trying to morph it all into the same argument.
again, if the feds are so concerned about a monopoly, why then did they allow directive to swallow 3.7 MILLION subs that were primestar????? and it couldn't turn a profit at that number, but i've seen the posters on here saying 1 million will break even for voom, try 5 million!!!!
dragon
first thank you for not ranting. i appreciate it, really!
these people are trying to save HDTV by using the digital and monopoly argument, HDTV is not on the fcc screen and they are trying to morph it all into the same argument.
again, if the feds are so concerned about a monopoly, why then did they allow directive to swallow 3.7 MILLION subs that were primestar????? and it couldn't turn a profit at that number, but i've seen the posters on here saying 1 million will break even for voom, try 5 million!!!!
dragon
dragon002 said:
What?
Who said anything about "trying to save HDTV"? I for one don't think the HDTV exclusive marketing approach has worked.
The FCC statement makes it clear they want more competition in the space and not less. Don't know where you get your 5 million figure, but if you've worked up a business plan for a DBS startup, I'd love to see the details to understand your prespective.
BTW, Joe who posted above deserves credit for posting that FCC link in another Forum. Thanks Joe.
dragon002 said:
PrimeStar was run by PrimeStar Partners whose member owners were the large cable companies. PrimeStar was crippled from the start on that basis. It can be argued that there was no reduction in competition because of who the owners were.
dragon002 said:
Um, what kill is that? You breathe a lot of hot air (as dragons do) about no market for HDTV and then claim Chuckie and D* will swoop in for the kill. You can't have it both ways.
Many Voom subs are early adopters of new technology. Most are FORMER E* and D* subscribers. Heck, I was one of the first E* subs myself when other trolls on similar boards were claiming E* would never survive. But that was then and this is now. E* and D* are now far behind the cable companies in their offerings of both programming and technology with only a very small edge on price.
So if Voom does go bust I do not think many will be running back to Charlie or D*. The big benefactor will be the cable companies.
FCC is interested in HD or they would not have spent millions and decades on research to come up with approved systems .(still not a very good job on their part) They did mandate digital with the expectation that the marketplace will drive the force for HD. That is just beginning to happen as the networks are converting most of their schedule to HD. Also I didn't see this quote in these posts that Mr. Ergen made yesterday.
When asked what the message is when a cable pioneer like Dolan is betting some of his cable stock on satellite TV, Ergen said Dolan "very much has visions that make sense."
When asked what the message is when a cable pioneer like Dolan is betting some of his cable stock on satellite TV, Ergen said Dolan "very much has visions that make sense."
Dragon002 (and any other assorted Trolls that may be present...) Before the flames start, if you deem it appropriate in this case...fair warning...
I won't be back to enjoy any roasts until probably Tuesday, so you can decide whether you want to conserve your energy until then...or not.
I only scanned some posts in this thread from people I have grown to trust as putting forth a balanced, educated response.
Upon detailed reading (which I don’t currently have time for, I don’t know if I will still see things as my "trusted" posters do in this thread, or whether I'll disagree on particular aspects.) I’ll put in my 2 cents on that level when I have time to catch up and evaluate the current circumstances.
But upon scanning...since I have a little unfinished business because of your lack of response to any of my specific questions to you in this thread http://www.satelliteguys.us/showthread.php?t=57315 or this one http://www.satelliteguys.us/showthread.php?t=57412…not to mention, a confused and confusing PM you sent me a few days ago…(shall I post it for you??)...I you now wish to respond the those questions, it would be most appropriate in the respective threads, just to keep things in context and perspective.
...Back to your quote above...I’m still wondering who you are and what your agenda may be, but I felt totally compelled to spend the time to state THIS here, again...
..."Joe and Jane Six-Pack" are NOT stupid. They are the persons on the street, and may be simply not yet experienced because they didn't hear of all this hoopla until VoOm encountered the current problems.
And they won't be more adequately exposed to allow them to decide if they want to gain experience and knowledge in these matters…that is, if some folks (possibly ones like you)...have their way.
I hope to help insure that those folks don't succeed, if there's any way to prevent it.
I also wanted to note here, just in general, that I see a little more “truth in advertising” tonight for some folks in this thread…but then some of those folks I refer to have a habit of changing their avatars and tag lines the same way most of the rest of us change our underwear…on a daily basis. Vicki
mdonnelly said:
Cablevision only controls a cluster in the New York region. Thus, Voom competes against the other providers in every other region, meaning that there would be a reduction in competition in every other region. The member owners in PrimeStar Partners operated clusters across the country.
