 JoePro
join:2006-11-01
Montreal, QC
 ·ELECTRONICBOX
| reply to hm
Re: VMedia fights mandatory channel carriage »www.vmedia.ca/info/partners.aspx |
|
|
|
 En EnferThis account has been compromised
join:2003-07-25
Montreal, QC
kudos:4 | reply to HeadSpinning
said by HeadSpinning:The costs are not one time. Equipment and software have licensing and service contracts. There are per subscriber fees for middleware. There are required upgrades as time goes on. Yeah, ok, so does Rogers, Shaw, Videotron, Cogeco, and Bell Fibe. Expenses for maintenance are no different here.
said by HeadSpinning:That translates in to a per subscriber cost. I'm just trying to point out that your assertion that everything above the programming costs are pure profit are overstated. Ah, I get it. Maybe I used the wrong terms.
The CRTC have numbers on public record that gives an idea how much each specialty channel receives in subscriber revenues. That ~5$ from your cable bill actually goes to the broadcasters who re-invest that money by producing and acquiring rights to shows.
We have no clue (and no desire to know) how much it costs for the company to run day-to-day operations : building, equipment, salaries, transit costs... and the rest goes to pure profits. Off course, for any new company launching a product from scratch, there won't be any profit during the first year. I should have said instead "revenues minus known constant expenses is 20$".
The problem, as I pointed out, is that Vidéotron in Quebec offers standalone digital TV basic service for 23$, and they must charge extra in each product for the distribution costs (fiber, poles usage, digging, repair).
How do you explain that Vmedia charges 25$ for a similar basic (with a ~2.44$ difference for extra channels), but have no expenses on similar distribution costs? IPTV is just data that transits trought your internet connection. Your IISP pays the incumbent provider for the usage of last mile, not content providers like Google, VoIP or IPTV.
Let me rephrase the question for you: Which expenses IPTV providers have to pay extra that Rogers, Shaw, Cogeco or Videotron don't ? What justifies such a high price ?
--
Tell your children over dinner, "Due to the economy, we are going to have to let one of you go." |
|
 ExidorPremium
join:2001-05-04
Brampton, ON | reply to GeorgeBurger
On the topic at hand, from The Globe and Mail:
IPTV’s new wave looms over cable’s old guard
»www.theglobeandmail.com/technolo···0326529/
You may/may not need a membership subscription to view the article, I honestly don't know.  |
|
| Wow thanks Exidor, hadn't seen it yet! |
|
Reviews:
 ·TekSavvy Cable
1 edit | reply to GeorgeBurger
This off topic but they've 25/2 cable internet package for $36.95 will this be available in North York, GTA? What's the bandwidth cap on this package? I assume a Docsis 3.0 modem is required? Are you allowed to bring your modem? I would be interested in signing up as I'm ready to leave Teksavvy after 7 years and looking for an ISP with better customer service and lower prices. |
|
 rosenquiPremium
join:2004-05-28
Kanata, ON | reply to En Enfer
Where do you get the idea that transit is free for the IPTV provider/ISP? According to Acanac/Zazeen, that's going to be one of the largest costs in their IPTV service - increased capacity charges from Rogers/Bell/etc. due to the extra traffic incurred by their IPTV customers.
The CRTC does not allow regulated TV channels (CTV, TSN, HGTV, etc) to be delivered "over the top" a la Netflix. It must be done using what they deem to be a "closed network", which means vMedia must partner with one or more ISPs or be an ISP themselves in order to be able to service any customers. It's the ISPs that incur all of those extra transit charges, and that cost is reflected in the TV subscription price.
If vMedia was allowed to offer their service over the top, then you would have a valid argument and it's quite likely that their prices would be somewhat lower.
--
Adventures in Canadian cord cutting - »canadiancordcutting.blogspot.ca/ |
|
 GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:19 | reply to GeorgeBurger
IPTV providers are required to deliver service over a closed network, either their own or via peering arrangements. There are no transit costs for IPTV because they're not allowed to let it pass through the public internet. The only capacity-based costs would be CBB costs.
EDIT: Clarification, "transit" normally refers to internet transit, not CBB costs.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org |
|
TypeS
join:2012-12-17
London, ON Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
| said by Guspaz:IPTV providers are required to deliver service over a closed network, either their own or via peering arrangements. There are no transit costs for IPTV because they're not allowed to let it pass through the public internet. The only capacity-based costs would be CBB costs.
EDIT: Clarification, "transit" normally refers to internet transit, not CBB costs.
This implies then the IPTV servers and headend equipment would need to be located at the peering ISPs data center? Does everyone in Canada operate out 151 Front? If so I don't see a problem I think. |
|
GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:19 | said by TypeS:This implies then the IPTV servers and headend equipment would need to be located at the peering ISPs data center? Does everyone in Canada operate out 151 Front? If so I don't see a problem I think. You can peer over a remote link like a LAN extension, but most IPTV providers are either located in or connected to 151 Front. The exception might be Colba, but they're not interested in peering with anybody. Furthermore, word is that Colba may be restricting their IPTV service to people connected to their own DSLAMs.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org |
|
TypeS
join:2012-12-17
London, ON | Dedicated WAN links are not cheap lol. That would definitely be an expensive monthly cost. But sounds like everyone's operating out of 151 Front anyway. |
|
GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:19 | reply to GeorgeBurger
They're not expensive... IIRC a GigE would be under a thousand a month, and if you're in an urban area it may even be cheaper to just lease the fiber directly, or pay to have your own pulled through the conduits.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org |
|
 hm
@videotron.ca | reply to rosenqui
said by rosenqui:According to Acanac/Zazeen, that's going to be one of the largest costs in their IPTV service - increased capacity charges from Rogers/Bell/etc. due to the extra traffic incurred by their IPTV customers.
I am under the impression that Acanacs proposed throttling (cutting speed in half, or more) is the direct result of their IPTV offering.
Paul (Acanac) stated he used something like just under 1000-gigs a month for 3 STB's. So to me they are recouping costs, or preventing congestion (priority to IPTV) by their throttle. So in effect, if you don't even have IPTV with Acanac you end up footing the bill and getting throttled for their IPTV subscribers. At least, that is the plan as they wrote it here to my understanding.
It will be interesting to see how Vmedia (the ISP) handles congestion and spikes at peak time. |
|
Viper359Premium
join:2006-09-17
Scarborough, ON Reviews:
 ·voip.ms
| reply to GeorgeBurger
The lack of surround sound is what will prevent this early adopter from joining you. I didn't spend nearly 10K on my home entertainment system to listen to 2.0 channel stereo audio for my tv shows.
I mean come on, DD doesn't add that much bandwidth. This sounds more like licence fee's are getting in the way. |
|
| Is it just me or did the countdown timer on vmedia.ca get pushed back a couple of times?
So what are the prices and service changes?
Vmedia.ca only shows 19.95 on it's un-updated webpage, while Vmedia's other site, viatnettv.com shows 24.95$
Is vmedia just copying over the IPTV costs and internet costs from vianettv.com as it's update?
Not sure what's going on with this. |
|
GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:19 | reply to GeorgeBurger
vianettv.com also shows "from $19.95", but the basic package is priced at $24.95.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org |
|
| reply to Viper359
+1
I wouldn't sign up for a 2.0 only provider. |
|
| reply to Guspaz
Nothing's going on, the $19.95 was a holdover from our original even skinnier basic plans, but then life got in the way, and we were slow to fix it because we were focused on the new site, and a million other things we had to do. Sorry for the oversight. |
|
En EnferThis account has been compromised
join:2003-07-25
Montreal, QC
kudos:4 | reply to En Enfer
Some maths for an educated guess. Let's establish the real costs of a specialty package with common sense. I already established on page 4 that only ~5$ out of the 25$ from basic service will actually go to the channels, the remaining 20$ stays with vmedia for operation costs and profits. Those prices come from public financial data from the CRTC (added revenues / subscribers / 12) === Premium Basic === Showcase $0.38
Bravo! $0.29
Discovery $0.52
Comedy $0.35
MTV Canada $0.12
BNN $0.29
Space $0.27
Sportsnet $1.29
Sportsnet One $0.70
Total : $4.21 AMC, A&E, CNN, NFL Network, HLN and TCM : american specialties, unknown numbers. Since I don't have numbers for the six american specialties, I'll take the average from the numbers I already have ($4.21 / 9) : 0.47$ x 6 = $2.82 Grand total : ~7.03$ from this 15$/month package actually goes to the broadcasters. The remaining 8$ is pure profits. === Distribution === We need to establish an acceptable profit a distributor can make. Obviously, a specialty channel do the hard work: producing shows, sell advertising, put them on the air, etc., while a distributor just takes the signal an delivers it to the subcribers. So, a 100% profit should be logic's maximum. George says he expects to offer à la carte, so let's comapre with the established competitors : Videotron : 10 channels for 20$, 15 channels for 23$, 20 channels for 26$, 25 channels for 29$, 30 channels for 32$ (ranges between $1.07 and 2$ per channel) » www.videotron.com/residential/te···at620047Bell Fibe (Qc) : 15 channels for 18$, 20 channels for 22$, 30 channels for 25$ (ranges between 0.83$ and 1.20$ per channel) » fibetv.bell.ca/global/resources/···20130212Conclusion, paying 1$ per channel per month sounds like a acceptable reasonable price for à la carte, and is nearby the 100% profit logic. On the other hand, pre-assembled packages where channels costs them between $0.40 and $0.48 in average with profits should be sold to the customer at a lower rate than 1$ per channel. If Bell is able to make money at 0.83$ per channel... Vmedia's basic service costs 25$. Their Premium Basic costs 40$. A 15$ difference. Yet, as calculcated up there, channels in that package cost them 7$ for 15 channels. If I use above logic, vmedia should make only 6$ of profit instead of 8$ to be a good deal, so "basic + premium basic" should cost 38$ or less, not 40$. When you visit vmedia's Theme Packs section, you'll notice that packages containing 6 channels costs 7$, except off course Pay TV ones. Obviously, Vmedia can cost less than Rogers Ontario in the end, but it's still making huge profits. It's not gonna revolution the IPTV landscape like VoIP and IISPs. Amen. --
Tell your children over dinner, "Due to the economy, we are going to have to let one of you go." |
|
| said by En Enfer:=== Distribution ===
We need to establish an acceptable profit a distributor can make.
Who appointed you king of the universe? No you don't need to "establish an acceptable profit" - that's why there's competition and market forces.
The part that needs to be regulated are the unnatural barriers to entry due to vertically integrated BDUs.
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net |
|
TypeS
join:2012-12-17
London, ON Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
| reply to En Enfer
said by En Enfer:=== Distribution ===
We need to establish an acceptable profit a distributor can make.
As Headspinning pointed out, who are we, as consumers, to tell a private enterprise how much profit they get to make? You get to do that indirectly by choosing a competitor but otherwise it's not really your business. Last I checked we live in a social democratic nation with a pseudo free market economy. Chasing profits and recognition is the bases of starting your business. I'm sure you like it when your employer rewards you with raise for a improving your productivity. Or getting paid for a certain level of education and skill set. Not to mention you've ignored pig portion of any companies costs, labour. Everyone wants an above fair salary where they've got enough to live off and spend on luxuries without going paycheck to paycheck; as well as saving for retirement and a rainy day.
Obviously, Vmedia can cost less than Rogers Ontario in the end, but it's still making huge profits. It's not gonna revolution the IPTV landscape like VoIP and IISPs.
As for IISPs, their costs are being defined by government regulatory body, their current profit margins I am sure not purely by choice. We've all read the CBB decisions, the capacity rates are bogus. If they were fair and representative of real cost, I don't think we'd see IISPs racing to the bottom of barrel for price. A fair price on a service does not mean a slim profit margin. |
|
