Satellite Real Estate and the future of FTA

[rrob311]

With all of the FTA channels going down off of satellites lately one has to wonder how much it costs to have a station/channel transmitted onto a satellite. With some of these channels just going away or streaming on the internet it seems like there is going to be much more space for channels on all of these satellites in the sky. Since DTV and DN pretty much have a biopoly(is that a word?) at this point one would think that soon they will be broken up with antitrust suits. There needs to be some new competition out there at some point. With C-band going down along with a lot of the Ku FTA there is a void that will need to be filled. I got into FTA because I simply cannot afford an extra bill every month. I think that FTA will continue to be an attractive investment for anyone in a rural area.

When Cable TV first came out in the US it was first put into an area that did not have much if any OTA reception and it was to bring TV to the people of NE PA. Back then FTA wasn't an option and when C band came out much later it was pretty expensive. Anyone that I knew that had Cband in the 80s were well off. Now DTV and DN have pretty much wiped out Cband but many people cannot afford much and now that FTA setups are very cheap it seems like it would allow people to have free reception in areas that don't have OTA options. I think that if the job situation in this country continues in the same direction less people will want to pay to watch tv so there is hope for FTA imho. Between the cable companies, DN, and DTV they have a majority of households in the country paying them money every month when there should be more options especially now that the technology has gotten way better.

It just seems like a lot of the dish space is going to be wasted and the satellite owners are going to have to lower prices or do something to attract more channels. With all of the advertising money/opportunity out there I feel like there is a bright future for FTA or at least maybe some better pricing with a new satellite provider. Seriously these big guys are getting way too big just like the phone companies. It seems like in the near future satellite internet will become more affordable if anything. Some of the networks spend enough money on VHF/UHF broadcasting so maybe someone will see some opportunity in doing the same with satellites. It doesn't seem like it would cost more to transmit from the ground to the sky as opposed to having large antennas (especially in flat areas) in order to put the stations out there that need to be lit so air traffic does not run into it.

 

[harshness]

Glorystar is a pretty good case study.

Casting on the Internet requires a robust Internet connection. Satcasting requires that and a whole lot more, so why bother with the satellite leg of the trip?

 

[rrob311]

I know of enough broke people with dead DN/DTV dishes nailed to their roof that there is plenty of opportunity for somebody to get rich selling fta receivers and lnbs that will fit the dishes on their house at least to point the dish at 125w and/or 97w and have plenty to watch. Until so many people converted their old dishes that eventually DN/DTV would get mad and either start taking dishes away or threaten to sue people for salvaging their litter.

 

[Mr Tony]

SatelliteAv has insider info since he works with the religious channels on 97W....He posted some of the pricing a while back

 

[Anole]

You can bet big-money (cable companies, DishNetwork, DirecTV) will lobby against any new competition!

 

[rrob311]

Hopefully they will be put through anti trust proceedings and lose customer base. There is already enough competition springing up on the internet with Hulu etc.

 

[photoman76]

I think it's more likely that Dish and Directv will merge. I don't ever see a third satellite provider entering the scene. Even with the changeover to DVB-S2 and Mpeg 4, Intelsat and SES-World Skies satellites are quite full with all the new HD and 3D channels and satellite internet. All channels have to make money. You either have to charge a subscription fee or be supported by advertising, or in the case of religious channels by donations and fundraisers.

 

[Dee_Ann]

Well I for one can't afford pizza dish tv, as much as I wish I could. Heck, the ways prices are going up on everything, I can barely afford to buy decent groceries anymore.

Local OTA tv here is an intellectual wasteland in the evenings. And with the loss of THC, there's NOTHING to watch from 7pm to midnight anymore. PBS runs a lot of news/debate shows in the evening and I don't care for that. Or civil war stuff. No thanks. PBS is pure pot luck. Sometimes they have some really great stuff, sometimes not so much.

So what happened to those jokers that claimed they were going to bring a bazillion free channels to FTA satellite? I was sure that was a phony troll from the get-go. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is..

I hate to say it but I see that Greed is King in the US and there is no profit in "Free"... "Free" is just sooooo un-American..

 

[radio]

So what happened to those jokers that claimed they were going to bring a bazillion free channels to FTA satellite? I was sure that was a phony troll from the get-go. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is..I hate to say it but I see that Greed is King in the US and there is no profit in "Free"... "Free" is just sooooo un-American..

As far as Free being "UnAmerican".......I disagree. It's just that "Free" is not a business model that can support growth and continued existence of most goods or services, which is how our economy is based. In FTA's case, there have been some channels added lately, we viewers have lost some channels, and that's how it goes! But, that's why FTA is, for most, a "hobby" that lends entertainment to our homes. Someone made the point here a long time ago (and I agree) that FTA may actually grow now, as terrestrial TV sub channels, smaller cable systems etc; are hungry for content. Agreed. As new content starts-up, there's no more reliable distribution than satellite. The 'net just can't be considered as stable or reliable for distribution to professional outlets. I believe we'll see many changes on the 'birds this year.....and no lack of programming to enjoy.

Differing opinions of course, welcomed.....
Now back to our regualrly scheduled programming.....
Member FDIC......

oops. Too many disclaimers these days, EVERYWHERE.

 

[Art7220]

PhotoMan, what about the other 2 providers Expressvu and Shaw Direct? DirecTV and DN haven't gotten rid of them yet.

 

[SatelliteAV]

Certainly a perception is out there that does not reflect the reality of the satellite market. Demand for satellite bandwidth continues to grow and I wouldn't expect any discounts as the price is regulated by supply and demand. Satellite is the least expensive distribution method for a broadcaster to deliver multicast programming to more than 15 or 20 sites. The DTH satellite market North America continues to grow and we have more unencrypted programming available now than at any point since I started in satellite over 25 years ago. The technology changes and we need to change with it by migrating to a different band, decoding method and transition away from linear streaming media (I.E. broadcasting).

North America DTH has too much open space that is not economical to be served by wire / fiber land based high bandwidth. Satellite addresses this geographical challenge and will continue to be a preferred delivery method until another wide area wireless technology can provide bandwidth and reliability. High speed by powerline and wide area WiFi have not materialized to service rural areas and cellular may become the dominant technology to provide access to multimedia.

Is the sky falling? Absolutely not! Is broadcasting dying? Absolutely! Is media consumption increasing? Absolutely! We are watching a rapid evolution in the delivery of media. Just like the town crier, magazine subscriptions and the newspaper, TV and radio is changing. My prediction is that in 10 years from now, most of us will still have satellite dishes, but instead of primarily watching linear programming services, we probably be capturing datacasts and accessing or archiving our favorite content on a local memory bank, regional / national repositories or "Clouds".

 

[Anole]

PhotoMan, what about the other 2 providers Expressvu and Shaw Direct? DirecTV and DN haven't gotten rid of them yet.

ExpressVu / BEV / Bell (multiple names for) a Canadian business serving only Canadian customers.
Shaw Direct / Star Choice (multiple names for) a Canadian business serving only Canadian customers.
And as such, they don't compete for customers with US-based DirecTv nor DishNetwork.

 

[Anole]

not even 10 years

...My prediction is that in 10 years from now, most of us will still have satellite dishes, but instead of primarily watching linear programming services, we probably be capturing datacasts and accessing or archiving our favorite content on a local memory bank, regional / national repositories or "Clouds".

I have several computers on my home network.
They receive OTA, satellite, and internet programming when it is available.
Connected to a hi-def TV in the living room is a little media-player box which gives access to all that content, plus Netflix and similar services.
Quality is increasing, with more 720 and 1080 video in the mix. All is 16x9.

Prime-time begins whenever is convenient, by jumping directly into TV series, and movies from storage.
Sometimes I wait for a series to finish, or at least get a few episodes out there, before watching it.
That way, if I want to see several episodes at a time, I can.

Many members on the forum have much fancier multi-room systems, but my meager lash-up gets the job done.

 

[empiretc]

I wait for a series to finish, or at least get a few episodes out there, before watching it.
That way, if I want to see several episodes at a time, I can.

Is there any other way to watch a series?

 

[Bob2011]

I think alot of folks don't understand that nearly everything in America is done for a
profit. Every satellite channel up there is paid for by an organization either to profit
through your viewership or to reprogram your mind. Even in Europe what looks like free
satellite is paid for by the public through licensing or taxes. If you were to look at the
rest of the world the future of TV is pushing towards IPTV because of the availability of
high speed connections. With government subsidized internet in these countries you can see a time where broadcast tv is pointless when everyone has a high speed internet connection.

The US of course operates on a different playing field where better technology will be held back if it is not profitable enough or hurts the profits of established infrastructure. The internet here is controlled by corporations who for the most part have TV operations in their portfolio. So for IPTV to flourish here it would have to be provided directly by the
internet provider with a subscription structure. If TV networks were to attempt large scale internet TV on their own I am sure the internet providers would work to shut it down or cripple it through throttling or data caps. If anyone here was an early high speed internet subscriber back before Napster then they understand this can happen. I remember before Napster when upload speeds where nearly as fast as downloads at Comcast. Then when Napster exploded they figured out a way to get their network back by simply crippling the upload speed to 128K. It took over five years for those speeds to come back up but they were never the same. The solution now is a monthly data cap.

So in ten years I still see a mix of all technologies. There will be more internet TV for
networks with small viewership because it will be cheaper than satellite. Large networks
will still use satellite to distribute programming to cable and DTH satellite providers but
may move to fiber/landline for secondary programming. This move would cut us out of an
opportunity to get FTA so by then we may be down to strictly foreign channels and a few religious channels. Now if channels go off of satellite it may open opportunities for data downloads like SatelliteAV described above. New satellites may become even more powerful and everyone could have a tiny dish on their homes to collect programming in file form stored on large hard drives for later viewing.

 

[richyrich]

Sat TV for free will never die

When I started selling/installing DVB-S in 1992, people paid 1,500 for a receiver to get 5 channels. There has never been more channels available, and with the multi-casting of so many channels for each transponder, it has never cost them less to broadcast. So, where is my "ranching for profit" and "The Cattlemans Channel"? It's being held back by the newest large Corp. that want to be the only broadcaster; own all the broadcast rights; buy's other smaller cable/channel/communication companies; and wants to not spend money on a "new" channel, but instead wants to syndicate a "program" like it, and show it on one of his channels, making instant profit, and have instant gratification, knowing he could've spent millions, and never made a cent.

As the rest have said; is all too true. Internet bandwidth is not costly; but is by no means the easiest way to get started or to broadcast to the most people whom will sell your programs and channels,cable;pie sky dishes (look at "the sportsmans channels"); fiber; No matter what, it is a business, and the more hands you can get your channel into, the more you will make.
Look at your local channels, they have noless value on their ad dollar (the most); and they have their most valuable programs on replay on every channel around to get re-payed...
The bandwidth game is really where satellite tv/microwaves have been; and they get globalized in its use; and nowhere of a CONUS cannot be seen with one, and mileage, 44k miles, to really, there isn't a limit when you travel on light...As such, 50 MHz per transponder has neverbeen worth more...

 

[El_Viejo]

Just as an example, MHZ Worldview left 97W because of the high cost. I emailed them to ask why they were off the satellite and that is what they responded, that they were going to use other less expensive means to supply their channel to their affiliates. They are similar to the pbs setup as I understand it. So they are supported by donations and/or sales from their online store. Look at 123W, there is hardly anything there now, so so much for others grabbing up open transponders. i.e. FreeDBS!! El_Viejo

 

[zamar23]

My prediction is that in 10 years from now, most of us will still have satellite dishes, but instead of primarily watching linear programming services, we probably be capturing datacasts and accessing or archiving our favorite content on a local memory bank, regional / national repositories or "Clouds".

Wouldn't be more realistic outcome resulting in sharp decrease in dish installations, while people be downloading streamed from local repositories content over a landline internet or wide area Wi-Fi? Though the satellite leg may still be used to distribute the content to local depositories?

The "broadcasting dying" observation seems to be confirmed by market reports like Slowdown in N. American digital cable and satellite subscribers hurts video infrastructure market. But it may be a sign of falling middle class income rather than technology breakthrough. I agree with Bob2011 that we are to see star wars between various providers intensify. For example, many companies delivering Cable TV, also offer Cable Internet services. For them increase in IPTV traffic would seem to mean scrapping old Cable TV infrastructure that gives now pure profit for decades without significant investment, and increasing their Internet capabilities that require significant new investments - only to achieve seemingly same result of delivering the SAME content to subscribers via IPTV which is now delivered via Cable TV, and possibly at lower sub fees. So they would fight to death lobbing to block this move as they can, and simple way is to impose Internet traffic caps & over-usage fees. That's seen currently happening in Canada with Rogers heavily lobbying legislators & government bodies to block unlimited Internet subs offered by their competitors.

 

[rrob311]

Ya where I live (20 minutes outside a major city) I have low bandwidth on my DSL line and almost no OTA TV reception. So my options for high speed are a weak DSL connection or a choppy Cable internet connection, or satellite. I think that a lot of people can't afford a subscription every month with prices going up the way they have been so there should be a lot of opportunity for all of these abandoned pizza dishes to point to something else where another company will have a lot of opportunity to take market share away from the large providers. Even if they paid for a couple of coveted channels to broadcast FTA someone should be able to have enough opportunity with advertisement profits to make something happen.