 RexterYeeHaw
join:2002-11-17
cloud 9 | Dumb Pipes What if TV providers like Comcast, DishNetwork, Direct TV, ect. simply served as a dumb pipe provider. Each channel space could be auctioned to the highest bidder. People would actually buy the channels ala carte directly from the Networks, but through the provider. This would be a radical change, but much more in line with how technology works these days, and this would put an end to such conflicts.
--
With every new wave of optimism, or pessimism, we are ready to abandon history, and time tested principles, but we cling tenaciously and unquestioningly to our prejudices. (Benjamin Graham) |
|
|
|
| You can. Ever heard of C-BAND? |
|
| C-Band is going the way of the dodo bird for the home viewer end user.
NPS is mostly pushing pizza dish now and other providers don't have a lot of channels anymore. |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | reply to Rexter
Sorry.. no slam to you, but "dumb idea"... If you even thought about that, you're putting way too much control in the hands of the content owners... VERY VERY VERY bad idea.. at this the way the system works now, you have the cable companies being watched and there is some point in the chain to put pressure on. All you would be doing, in your idea is to push it even farther away from regulators and the government in general.
This would be just about as effective as removing local franchises in favor of the state-wide franchise.
It wouldn't put an end to ANY conflicts.. well, actually it would, simply put, you'd pay what ever the hell the content owner/provider wanted.. period. Where's the competition then?
You need a billionaire to fight a billionaire.. imagine telling Discovery Networks you don't want their network becuase it's too high.. who you going to go to for competition to get a better rate for... "discovery networks"...?
In short, you took an entire paragraph to state "I want ala cart pricing"... |
|
| reply to Rexter
said by Rexter:... Comcast, DishNetwork, Direct TV, ect. simply served as a dumb pipe provider. That's vaguely similar to how Sky (the monopoly pay-tv satellite provider in the UK, and the monopoly outright in many areas) operates. Sky doesn't own the satellites they broadcast, neither do they own all the transponders.
The broadcasters lease transponders from the companies that do own the satellites, and can uplink when/where/how they see fit. They only have to pay Sky for a position on the EPG (and encryption if they want it).
We aren't quite there when it comes to alacarte, but the notable broadcasters (BBC, ITV, Ch4 and Ch5) are all free to air anyway.
There is also Freesat, of course. |
|
 56403739Less than 5 months leftPremium
join:2006-03-08
Naples, FL
kudos:2 | reply to fiberguy
said by fiberguy:you'd pay what ever the hell the content owner/provider wanted.. period. Where's the competition then? imagine telling Discovery Networks you don't want their network becuase it's too high.. who you going to go to for competition to get a better rate for... "discovery networks"...? That is already happening, but in reverse. Big cable networks like ESPN are using the fees cable customers are forced to pay them even if the customer does not watch ESPN to out-bid free-to-air broadcast networks and monopolize high-value programming like BCS football games, etc.
A la carte is not the holy grail but it would go far to eliminate this nonsense by exposing the true value of these channels to the market. |
|
RexterYeeHaw
join:2002-11-17
cloud 9 | reply to fiberguy
said by fiberguy:If you even thought about that, you're putting way too much control in the hands of the content owners... VERY VERY VERY bad idea.. Hmm... interesting. I'll try to do a better job of controlling my thoughts.
said by fiberguy:you'd pay what ever the hell the content owner/provider wanted.. period. Where's the competition then? No business, except government induced monopolies, get to charge whatever the hell they want. They charge whatever the hell the market allows. The Discovery Channel isn't some sort of inherent right that we should all have a access to at a reasonable price. If the price is too high people won't buy it, and some other company will come in, and do it better at a lower price. That's the competition, it takes a little forward thinking to understand.
said by fiberguy:You need a billionaire to fight a billionaire.. Do you really think that the service providers are fighting for you? It's you and your buddy Comcast fighting against the evil Descovery Network, who's product you want to consume, but at a price of your choosing. 
Good luck with that.
said by fiberguy:In short, you took an entire paragraph to state "I want ala cart pricing"... That wasn't my point at all. I don't actually subscribe to pay TV. My point was, that perhaps the current business model is obsolete. While I wouldn't say that content lineup will ever completely go away, the world is going on-demand.
--
With every new wave of optimism, or pessimism, we are ready to abandon history, and time tested principles, but we cling tenaciously and unquestioningly to our prejudices. (Benjamin Graham) |
|
RexterYeeHaw
join:2002-11-17
cloud 9 | reply to hottboiinnc
C-band did kind work that way, didn't it. As recall it wasn't administratively effective. The technology wasn't an effective fit either. Who wants to wait 1 1/2 minutes for the dish to move to another sat while changing the channel. With C-band you were actually buying channels from potentially multiple networks, and providers. This is not quite what I am talking about.
--
With every new wave of optimism, or pessimism, we are ready to abandon history, and time tested principles, but we cling tenaciously and unquestioningly to our prejudices. (Benjamin Graham) |
|
| if you want the option you'll take what you can get. If not you'll be happy with what you have now.
--
www.twopugsbrand.com ONLINE STORE NOW ONLINE! up to 50% off SRP of Happy Tails Spa products. |
|
