Jerome Sandler (SaveDBSCompetition) Files Reply with the FCC

[James Long]

The Association of Consumers to Preserve and Promote DBS Competition (namely Jerome Sandler and 200 alleged members) filed reply comments to Echostar and Rainbow DBS's Opposition to the Petition to Deny the transfer of Rainbow 1.

(Whew ... that's a mouthful even when typed!)

The comments are here.

JL

 

[BFG]

Pretty sorry reply to what Cablevision and E* attacked with

 

[Bruce]

This dude keeps trying, but Voom will be long gone way before the FCC rules on this sale.

 

[BFG]

hey bruce look what I just stumbled on: http://images.southparkstudios.com/media/sounds/812/LULULU.wav

 

[Bruce]

My computer starts up with that, never fails to give me a little smile each time.

 

[James Long]

The fact that there was no reply from Voom HD LLC doesn't help Mr Sandler's position. He went in to the proceeding with a Joint Filing, yet his partner has bowed out - both by allowing the Voom service to shut down and by not filing reply comments to the Oposition points raised specifically against Voom HD LLC.

The history of "the association" is weak. The domain name they use was only registered on March 18th ... just prior to the Petition to Deny ... and was not registered in the name of "the association".

It would be hard to prove that the association existed or that ANY membership was solicited prior to the March 28th filing. The "association's" charter on their website says that they are managed by a three person board, but the website fails to identify the members of that board. Jerome Sandler is the only name that appears on the FCC filings 'on behalf of the association'.

The "association" address (on FCC filings) is in Maryland and the "association" is allegedly "an unincorporated non-profit association formed under Delaware law". I've heard of incorporating in Delaware, but unincorporating? BTW: The address on the FCC filing is Mr Sandler's home address. The fax number at the top of the pages signed by Mr Sandler bear his home phone number and the text "Sandler and Associates".

None of these particulars of the association are available on their website. The 'charter', burried on the sign up form, gives a different address for service of notices and only a blind email address for contact. The blind address appears to be a corporation company (Delaware Corporate Services).

It looks like an "association" that doesn't want to be found.

JL

 

[Walter L.]

Even if the Mr Sandler's petition is ignored, the FCC can't do the same with the ~200 petitions filed independently (many of them from VOOMERS of this forum). However, at this point nothing will change the fact that VOOM is dead.

 

[James Long]

Even if the Mr Sandler's petition is ignored, the FCC can't do the same with the ~200 petitions filed independently (many of them from VOOMERS of this forum).

Sure they can. Go through those comments and see how many of them addressed the issue of license transfer. Eliminate the comments that said "save Voom", they are irrelevant as that isn't the question before the FCC. That brings down the count quite a bit. Look at the ones that said "this transfer should be denied because ..." and look at the reason.

Not a happy picture.

JL

 

[riffjim4069]

Unless Charlie decides to piss in the Commissioner's Wheaties (literally!) then---based on Cablevision's overwhelming decision to discontinue VOOM service---I don't see our comments having a great impact on the Commissions decision.

 

[Walter L.]

Unless Charlie decides to piss in the Commissioner's Wheaties (literally!) then---based on Cablevision's overwhelming decision to discontinue VOOM service---I don't see our comments having a great impact on the Commissions decision.

I agree. Hopefully, the FCC approves it without any delay (I'm rooting for Charlie now since I just signed up for E* ).

 

[BLW]

I would hope that the FCC would still hold back the 61.5 frequencies for a 3rd, yet to be announced (future sat. broadcaster to enter the market) and eliminate Echostar from acquiring them for the 4 year period that they have stated in prior rulings. I do not care if there is a provider in the waiting or not. Let the FCC stick to their rulings and not back track and issue the frequencies to a group that they have already with held them from in prior rulings.

By the way; where the hell is Tom Dolan in all this. C.Dolan is 79 years young, and should be enjoying the fruits of his labor. His loyal heirs should be continuing the fight for dad and the beliefs that that they have benefited from.

If I am dreaming, please don't slap me awake to hard. I like to wake up without a startling heart attack!!

Either way it's just TV, but the only TV I am willing to pay for!!!

 

[Ilya]

I wonder if FCC can deny the license transfer, revoke the licenses from Cablevision for not providing DBS services and put them on the auction to see if there are any other takers beyond E*?

 

[riffjim4069]

I agree. Hopefully, the FCC approves it without any delay (I'm rooting for Charlie now since I just signed up for E* ).

Both E* and D* will have to expand their HD offerings simply because Cable and Verizon TV aren't sitting idle. But I just don't see any significant improvement until 2006. Until then, I'm just waiting, begging, hoping, and praying for someone to offer something better than Adelphia.

 

[riffjim4069]

I wonder if FCC can deny the license transfer, revoke the licenses from Cablevision for not providing DBS services and put them on the auction to see if there are any other takers beyond E*?

That's an outside possibility, but in the meantime I will assume E* takes ownership of Rainbow-1 and does something with it...but what?

 

[Ilya]

That's an outside possibility, but in the meantime I will assume E* takes ownership of Rainbow-1 and does something with it...but what?

If the license transfer is denied the satellite sale is dead (the way I read it).

 

[riffjim4069]

If the license transfer is denied the satellite sale is dead (the way I read it).

Yes, but why would Cablevision want a dead satellite? And what would C. Dolan do with it after VOOM is shutdown? It's hard to imagine the FCC denying the sale and transfer considering the possible outcome.

 

[Ilya]

Yes, but why would Cablevision want a dead satellite? And what would C. Dolan do with it after VOOM is shutdown?

I am not sure E* would want the satellite without the licenses.

It's hard to imagine the FCC denying the sale and transfer considering the possible outcome.

I agree...

 

[James Long]

I would hope that the FCC would still hold back the 61.5 frequencies for a 3rd, yet to be announced (future sat. broadcaster to enter the market) and eliminate Echostar from acquiring them for the 4 year period that they have stated in prior rulings. I do not care if there is a provider in the waiting or not.

And what should Rainbow DBS do with its satellite until this mystical future broadcaster steps forward with the financing and desire needed to get a venture going? Should the FCC inflict a financial penalty on Rainbow DBS? Should the FCC inflict a financial penalty on the hypothetical '3rd' DBS provider by forcing them to buy Rainbow1?

It would be different if more than just Voom HD LLC filed to show interest in taking over the frequencies - not a Petition to Deny but a comment showing interest in obtaining the frequencies. It may have even helped Voom HD LLC's case if there were more than one "other player" in this drama.

But for the FCC to deny the transfer with only one other interested party is for the FCC to INTERFERE with Cablevision's business. In a way that would likely end up being reversed in the court system.

Let the FCC stick to their rulings and not back track and issue the frequencies to a group that they have already with held them from in prior rulings.

OK. The prior ruling applied to TP 23 and TP24. Keep those for the 3rd entrant just like the FCC previously ordered. But transfer the rest to E*, because there has been NO PRIOR RULING that prevents E* from taking over the other 11 channels.

Don't fall prey to the Petition to Deny misreading of the FCC's ruling. At no time have they banned E* from obtaining the 11 licensed transponders nor did they ban E* from holding STA on the 2 unassigned transponders. All they acted to TEMPORARILY prohibit was E*, D* and V* from holding TP23 and TP24 permanently.

It's hard to imagine the FCC denying the sale and transfer considering the possible outcome.

I agree...

The FCC has made some dumb decisions ... hopefully they will make this one correctly and not end up having it overturned in court.

BTW: The way the contract reads, Echostar and Cablevision have one year from January 20th to gain FCC approval ... and that can be extended for three months by either party if need be. Rejection by the FCC does not instantly cancel the contract - the parties have agreed to work together to get the licenses transfered. A rejection would likely just lead to a joint appeal NOT any sale to another party. E* wants this satellite and the licenses - don't expect them to simply walk away.

BTW2: If the license transfer fails the ownership transfer fails. Cablevision will own a satellite that it will have to sell AFTER the contract with Echostar expires (next year) or is mutually recinded.

JL