Ergen touts chances of a DirecTV-Dish Network merger winning approval

Scott Greczkowski

Thread Starter
Welcome HOME to SatelliteGuys!
Staff member
HERE TO HELP YOU!
Sep 7, 2003
98,486
15,471
Newington, CT
I know this is a stretch..but waaay back when they tried to merge the firsttime..i thought they had developed software that would allow directv recievers to see dish birds and viceversa..doesnt seem like much of a stretch since both use m-peg2 and mpeg 4 technology...it would just require a whole lotta of dish repointing..I think directv has the optimal satellite locations
From what I remember the DISH box could be easily updated via software to pick up the DIRECTV datasteam and by using a DIRECTV access card.
 

Mfinchv1

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 24, 2012
215
1
Bloomington Indiana
jerryez said:
When have you ever seen rates go down. Never Happen! Plus, their hardware is not compatible. They would have to change out either 14 million receivers or 18 million receicvers, and Charlie likes his own design. So, there would be no cost savings until the receivers are changed out, which would ake years.
Back in 2001...I think on Charlie chat..they where broadcasting to directtv already...cause where sayin...Directtv customers would get dishequipment...and it would be a effortless transition..for them not to worry. I think I even rememeber there new logo being at the bottom of the screen..Direct tv logo. Talk bout jumping the gun. But hes invested millions in a smartphone 2 already..and FCc hasnt approved that yet either
 

dms

Active SatelliteGuys Member
Pub Member / Supporter
Dec 7, 2005
23
0
yes you can ... everyone that wants locals would subscribe to the 3rd party company ... billing could be through your
sat programming provider ... similar to directv/ussb, for those that remember the days. cable channels from one provider , locals
from the new third party
 

Tampa8

Supporting Founder
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 8, 2003
17,831
7,226
Tampa/Eastern Ct
yes you can ... everyone that wants locals would subscribe to the 3rd party company ... billing could be through your
sat programming provider ... similar to directv/ussb, for those that remember the days. cable channels from one provider , locals
from the new third party
Step backwards, more complicated. And there is no way Dish or Direct would give up any spectrum to another company, so where is that company going to broadcast from? And how will they make the signal good for both Dish and Direct without they themselves having to upload all the locals twice? Neither Dish or Direct is going to change their boxes to be the same, spend all that money, just to have a third company make money selling them what they already sell. Or allow another company to make money even by billing on their own for locals. It's only being done with AAD because Dish had to. Otherwise there would be no AAD on Dish.

All that skirts the real issue, the model being used by the networks needs to change.
 

PTVC

TROLL
Oct 14, 2012
194
0
USA
But hes invested millions in a smartphone 2 already..and FCc hasnt approved that yet either
Did I miss the news that Dish was developing a smartphone, or are you referring to Dish's plans to use 40 MHz of satellite AWS-4 spectrum for LTE?
 

PTVC

TROLL
Oct 14, 2012
194
0
USA
Personally would not want a merger as that would be less completion which = higher prices. Don't they mention this every year? Along with AT&T buying Dish?
AT&T is after more wireless spectrum and has considered an acquisition of Dish. AT&T needs Dish more than Dish needs AT&T. Joe Clayton had said that, "We could be acquired, or we could be the acquirer." Clayton and Ergen have Expressed interest in a partnership. Personally, I think an acquisition by AT&T would be worse than a Dish/DirecTV merger.
 

ohioankev

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jul 25, 2007
626
44
I would gladly take a $4 fee over the $10 fee that Suddenlink charges for modem rental!
A good way to bypass those rental fees is to buy your own cable modem. ;) It'll pay for itself within a year or a little more and probably last at least five or six more years.
 

MikeD-C05

Pub Member / Supporter
Pub Member / Supporter
Nov 25, 2003
25,408
14,522
Nederland , Texas
why not just form a partnership of the 2 services that markets the local channels for the different dma's?
just think of the bandwidth that would be freed up if the locals were only uplinked once!
it could be the start of further partnerships

I kind of suggested that earlier in the thread and the last time they tried to merge too. It would make sense to run a joint company that is run by reps from both companies , and would do nothing but local channels. One time instead of multiple times, multiple arcs ,dishes etc. Would save a lot of money for both companies .
 

Mfinchv1

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 24, 2012
215
1
Bloomington Indiana

Scott Greczkowski

Thread Starter
Welcome HOME to SatelliteGuys!
Staff member
HERE TO HELP YOU!
Sep 7, 2003
98,486
15,471
Newington, CT
I believe he will have approval for it by the end of the year.

His big issue is the FCC wants his phone to support satellite calls as well as normal ground based cell networks. Charlie does not want to build in the satellite reception transmission hardware into the phones.
 

Mfinchv1

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 24, 2012
215
1
Bloomington Indiana
Scott Greczkowski said:
I believe he will have approval for it by the end of the year.

His big issue is the FCC wants his phone to support satellite calls as well as normal ground based cell networks. Charlie does not want to build in the satellite reception transmission hardware into the phones.
Well I hope he gets approval...im ready for a new service provider!!
 

356B

SatelliteGuys Pro
Lifetime Supporter
Dec 22, 2010
2,756
417
Northern California
I don't know...I've always believed competition is healthy. I remember the telephone wars and cable TV wars.
Granted in the short run prices would fall, specific availably of programming would expand, but with a monopoly other things eventually slump. Service becomes complacent, a take it or leave corporate philosophy evolves and in the long run the consumer gets charged more....sound familiar...? :coffee
 

Stargazer

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 7, 2003
16,562
337
Western WV
When have you ever seen rates go down. Never Happen! Plus, their hardware is not compatible. They would have to change out either 14 million receivers or 18 million receicvers, and Charlie likes his own design. So, there would be no cost savings until the receivers are changed out, which would ake years.
Don't forget, Charlie owns Echostar and they make the receivers. If they went with his design and swapped all the Directv receivers out then he would make some tidy profits through his Echostar company. That would be another bonus for him wanting a merger. He could spin off the wireless venture under a different company. Perhaps he could convert some of the extra satellite space towards using it for his wireless venture for more spectrum.
 

Mfinchv1

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 24, 2012
215
1
Bloomington Indiana
Stargazer said:
Don't forget, Charlie owns Echostar and they make the receivers. If they went with his design and swapped all the Directv receivers out then he would make some tidy profits through his Echostar company. That would be another bonus for him wanting a merger. He could spin off the wireless venture under a different company. Perhaps he could convert some of the extra satellite space towards using it for his wireless venture for more spectrum.
Didnt know Ergen owns Echostar...?
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Top