Mikey Fremer's take on the VOOM story.

hddoc

New Member
Original poster
Feb 21, 2004
4
0
http://ultimateavmag.com/michaelfremer/205mf/


Utopia Theater: Who's VOOMing Whom?

Michael Fremer, February, 2005


The king of HD satellite service sells some of its assets to competitor EchoStar.

A press release arrived in my email inbox just the other day announcing that Cablevision was throwing in the towel and selling off certain VOOM assets—specifically its Rainbow 1 satellite and FCC licenses to operate DBS services on 11 frequencies from the satellite's orbital location as well as ground facilities in South Dakota—to EchoStar (providers of DISH Network) for $200 million cash. "VOOM will continue providing service to its customers during a transition period," according to the release; in fact, the company says it is continuing to sign up new customers and install new systems. The transaction is subject to regulatory approvals, and what will ultimately happen to VOOM, the equipment, and the programming remains up in the air.

This news was not unexpected in many quarters, and it certainly was welcomed by Cablevision's board of directors, its stockholders, and Wall Street analyst-types. You know: the "bottom liners" with not a whit of imagination, foresight, or guts, who declared HDTV "dead" a year into its introduction because there was no "business model" demonstrating a "profit motive."

Coverage in the financial media of HDTV in general and VOOM in particular has been jaundiced at best and fraudulent at worst. True, VOOM has invested ("lost" is the word used in the hostile press) $75 million so far to build its DBS system and suite of exclusive programming. For instance, Wall Street Journal reporter Peter Grant has been positively malicious and/or ignorant in his coverage of this story, which has read more like a venomous gossip column than one having to do with technology or finances.

Then there was an "analysis" of the VOOM shut down in The New York Times by Andrew Ross Sorkin and Geraldine Fabrikant, who claimed that, "Sales of high-definition televisions and demand for programming to match have not materialized as fast as. . .many analysts had predicted." Out of whose butt did they pull that one? Most analysts predicted and rooted for an HDTV melt-down, so any sales would have surpassed their predictions.

In predicting the doom of VOOM a few months ago, The Wall Street Journal's Grant made comparisons with well-established services DirecTV and DISH Network—which have millions of subscribers compared to upstart VOOM's roughly 26,000—while failing to mention the high-definition distinction, which was VOOM's very reason for existing. By not mentioning VOOM's upscale, HD positioning, Grant made Cablevision Chairman and visionary Charles Dolan sound positively wacky for championing a third satellite service when there are already two competitors.

In later columns, Grant acknowledged HD but claimed that VOOM was having difficulties because the other services had added HD channels. Right. Show me a DirecTV subscriber with an HDTV and I will show you an unhappy DirecTV subscriber. DirecTV offers a pathetically limited roster of seven regular HD channels (ESPN, Universal, Discovery, HDNet, HDNet Movies, HBO, and Showtime), compared to VOOM's 39. Just before the plug was pulled, VOOM had closed the gap in its SD channel lineup, to become a no-brainer conversion for unhappy DirecTV and DISH HD customers (with the exception of NFL football fanatics). DirecTV plans a major HD upgrade beginning this year, but only for spot-beaming local HD broadcasts. According to a September 2004 press release, it won't be until "early 2007" that the service will launch two more satellites, giving DirecTV the capability of adding up to 150 new national HD channels to its roster.

Meanwhile, VOOM had the HD bandwidth now—more than a two-year lead over DirecTV—to capitalize on the HD boom. And I've heard rumors that DirecTV subscribers might have to scrap their dishes and receivers when the upgrade happens, but that's just a rumor.

I met with VOOM executives at CES to get an update on its long-promised HD PVR and to question the company's lackluster advertising and promotion, having been positively dazzled the day before at a Sirius Satellite Radio press event—and not just because the Dallas Cheerleaders paid a visit. That event was one of the most exciting and effective press events I have ever attended.

VOOM's $75 million investment had gotten them a paltry 26,000 subscribers since the service was rolled out third quarter of 2003. That is weak. The explanation I got was that before making a big promotional splash, VOOM wanted to work out the technical kinks and enhance the programming. When the "churn rate" (the number of subscribers canceling the service versus the number of new subscribers joining) reached equilibrium, the plan was to commence an aggressive new campaign to attract dissatisfied DirecTV and DISH HD subscribers and new HDTV buyers. I was told that the churn rate had stabilized, and that with the recent addition of a new satellite and more stations, and the soon-to-be-announced HD PVR and home network system, VOOM was preparing to launch a new push for subscribers.

Cablevision chairman Charles Dolan—one of the industry's true visionaries and the man behind VOOM—was instrumental in establishing HBO, Bravo, and many other pioneering and fabulously successful efforts in the pay/cable TV arena. He was laughed at when starting those ventures ("Pay for TV? No one will ever pay for TV!"), but he had the last laugh.

Now, the joke's on him: the demise of VOOM represents one of the greatest failures of the imagination in consumer electronics history. That the decision to shutter VOOM came as a result of Dolan's son James's betrayal of his own father, not to mention his support for Cablevision's Board of Directors and their myopic, short-term, bottom-line thinking, makes it a tragedy of Shakespearean proportions.

Had it been taped, the January 20 Cablevision board meeting where all of this went down (and the meetings leading up to it) would have made shows like The Apprentice, Survivor, and the rest of reality TV pale by comparison. VOOM, the Television Series—now there's a reality show I'd pay to watch! What will EchoStar's Charlie Ergen do with his new VOOM booty? Stay tuned!

Oh, by the way, bye Michael Powell—except for the idiotorial writers at The Wall Street Journal, you will not be missed.
 
vurbano said:
This guy is clueless. Voom has invested 75 million so far. OMG Im laughing to the point of crying.
There might be 2 who are cluess, Just Checked again, still can't find 1 out of >3000 post that you're a Voom Sub, You know Sean Mota's what type of equipment ect????
 
kelljc said:
There might be 2 who are cluess, Just Checked again, still can't find 1 out of >3000 post that you're a Voom Sub,


I am a Voom sub Sparky. FYI there is no golden list you can check to verify that.:rolleyes:

kelljc said:
You know Sean Mota's what type of equipment ect????

I find this post reminiscent of a thread you started where no one can undertand what your saying or asking? I believe Sean has E* and V* equipment is that what you are asking? How is knowing anything about Sean proof of being a Voom sub?
 
vurbano said:
I am a Voom sub Sparky. FYI there is no golden list you can check to verify that.:rolleyes:



I find this post reminiscent of a thread you started where no one can undertand what your saying or asking? I believe Sean has E* and V* equipment is that what you are asking? How is knowing anything about Sean proof of being a Voom sub?
Thank you for your input and where is your post under Sean's Question: still can't find it????,You may be right but only 5 post were neg: all from NON VOOMER"S, that i can tell. And by the way the only post's made on the subject:. don't you agree:
 
vurbano said:
What part don't you understand my name is "JERRY" please refer to it in the future, another example of misleading comment's, don't you agree: or a sly way of a put down effort:, we all what voom to work, I'm sure you do as me, no war or bad thoughts but why can't some just be truthfull so all new subs can make the correct choice. 1 more time sorry for the gad grammer:, and yes I did get thru HS, and beyond:
 
kelljc said:
There might be 2 who are cluess, Just Checked again, still can't find 1 out of >3000 post that you're a Voom Sub, You know Sean Mota's what type of equipment ect????

If you dont want to fight (and lose badly) then just stop attacking me.:rolleyes: My point was that the reporter is clueless. 26,000 subs? we know thats wrong. The article is really behind on the facts.
 
vurbano said:
If you dont want to fight (and lose badly) then just stop attacking me.:rolleyes: My point was that the reporter is clueless. 26,000 subs? we know thats wrong.
We EXPECT that is wrong, but so far we've had only ONE casual mention and one "unnamed source" of a higher number.

Don't like it? Get Voom to release a 'better' number! If they have 41k online Voom should be bragging about it - not allowing the media to use a 5 month old number.

JL
 
The author's parting shot makes it clear he writes with an agenda. Sloppy writing, loose with the facts and a little drama thrown in. Good bit for the NY Post, I guess. :D
 
At the time it was written, the published available number was in fact 26K subscribers. It's only since the article was published that the reported available subscriber numbers have gone up.

I'm not a big fan of Fremer's but if you're going to pick on him at least get your facts straight ;)


Cheer
 
Since Cablevision has told the SEC it lost $661 million on VOOM just last year, I would think the author's credibility is seriously in doubt.
A good tip to question an author is when he/she spends a lot of words trashing other journalists.
Kremer obviously has an agenda -- and that is fine.
But to base his arguments on obviously inaccurate information and then go for the jugular of others who report facts he chooses to ignore reflects poorly on him, not them.
 
justalurker said:
We EXPECT that is wrong, but so far we've had only ONE casual mention and one "unnamed source" of a higher number.

Don't like it? Get Voom to release a 'better' number! If they have 41k online Voom should be bragging about it - not allowing the media to use a 5 month old number.

JL
Get a life its been announced.
 
fredfa said:
Since Cablevision has told the SEC it lost $661 million on VOOM just last year, I would think the author's credibility is seriously in doubt.
A good tip to question an author is when he/she spends a lot of words trashing other journalists.
Kremer obviously has an agenda -- and that is fine.
But to base his arguments on obviously inaccurate information and then go for the jugular of others who report facts he chooses to ignore reflects poorly on him, not them.

Exactly right Fredfa
 
John Kotches said:
At the time it was written, the published available number was in fact 26K subscribers. It's only since the article was published that the reported available subscriber numbers have gone up.

I'm not a big fan of Fremer's but if you're going to pick on him at least get your facts straight ;)


Cheer

Sorry, but I didn't pick on any particular fact that was out of place or inaccurate.......there were so many.

Funny that you focused on the subscriber count since that is one another Forum member likes to harp on. Like a dog with a bone......
 
cfarm:

I picked on that particular point, since we know that it was in fact the subscriber number that was available at the time the article was written and published.

Other than some unverified rumours, I haven't seen anything concrete verifying subscribers in the 40K range coming out of Voom/Rainbow DBS, have you?

Cheers,
 
Cablevision 10-K released Mar 2005

The Rainbow DBS business began operations in October 2003 with the introduction of the VOOMSM service, which carries a larger number of high-definition channels than any other satellite provider or cable television system. As of December 31, 2004, the VOOMSM service offering included over 30 channels in high-definition, including 21 currently exclusive VOOMSM channels and over 70 standard definition channels. The VOOMSM service is currently transmitted by the Rainbow DBS satellite, Rainbow 1, that was constructed by Lockheed Martin, successfully launched in July 2003 and delivered to its 61.5°W.L. orbital position. From this orbital position, the satellite can provide coverage to the contiguous United States, provided customers have a line of sight to the satellite. As of February 28, 2005, Rainbow DBS had approximately 40,000 subscribers.
 
John Kotches said:
cfarm:

I picked on that particular point, since we know that it was in fact the subscriber number that was available at the time the article was written and published.

Other than some unverified rumours, I haven't seen anything concrete verifying subscribers in the 40K range coming out of Voom/Rainbow DBS, have you?

Cheers,

Like JL, you keep calling this unverified. This has been on the Net for 3 full weeks now:

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050228/nym238_1.html

It was posted in a thread in this very Forum. Unless you feel Tom Dolan is lying to the press, what's unverified about the number?
 

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

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)