oliphant5
Got Identity?
Premium
join:2003-05-24
Corona, CA
1 edit | reply to gpancner
Re: Interesting....
Okay...I'll feed the troll. For competition...what kind of broadband services does DTV offer? How many HDTV locals do they offer? How much VoD do they offer?
The DN/DTV merger was about BANDWIDTH CONSERVATION. You would have a single company no longer duplicating hundreds of channels. The merger would have permitted services not possible now like local HDTV programming in increased throughput for satellite internet services which are while latency laden...the only source of broadband downloads available to a lot of people. You would also have had a single company with enough subscribers to effectively bargain with programmers. Price wasn't an issue as DN/DTV has as part of the merger proposal was a nationwide pricing requirement meaning they couldn't gouge those in rural communities while dumping programming where there was cable competition. They would have had to price everyone as if they were in heavy competition areas like NYC and LA.
As it stands now...there is no competition to cable for a lot of subscribers like me...who desire multiple HDTV outlets (hardly cost effective with DTV) and local HDTV programming (not available and not planned with DTV)...which...if you would care to look around...is the future of video programming. Not to mention the people who can't get DSL or WISP so their choice is satellite which is FAP controlled because of limited available bandwidth (no thanks to the killing of the merger) or cable...which brings us back to the beginning...which is cables abuse of their market position because they have monopoly control over information services in a lot of their franchises.
Comcast,the largest cable company, for example abuses their market position by penalizing HSI customers who choose not to purchase their CATV products. And it's not a bundle...it was a price increase after their aquisition of ATTBi. I who have HDCATV never got any bundling discount while neighbors with DN or DTV saw their HSI rates skyrocket. So even if DirecTV is an option for video programming...it's not cost effective as cable HSI customers like those with Comcast can pay a 30% higher rate for their HSI.
You should bother collecting the facts before crossposting your nonsense from thread to thread.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network »www.theanimenetwork.com/index.html |
|
oliphant5
Got Identity?
Premium
join:2003-05-24
Corona, CA
| reply to gpancner
Again with the cheese...what's this...the 8th time? At least you spelled it right this time.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network »www.theanimenetwork.com/index.html |
|
gpancner
join:2001-09-27
Nine Mile Falls, WA
| reply to CrazyJr
your post indicates that their is competition provided by the likes of DTV in some communities? i thought DTV was available nationwide. is it just your pre-conceived dislike for cable companies that confuse you to the point of saying the merger would increase competition? competition is already out there. care for some cheese with your whine? |
|
J D McDorce
Premium
join:2001-12-29
Westland, MI
| reply to CrazyJr
One of the reasons why the FCC rejected the DirecTV / Echostar merger is because they consider satellite TV to be competition to cable. Such as merger would limit those areas serviced by a single cable provider to two choices (cable or the combined DirecTV-Echostar) versus the current three choice system (cable or DirecTV or Dish Network). The ultimate effect on competition remains to be seen. |
|
CrazyJr
join:2003-02-27
Oakland, CA
| The FCC rejected a merger between DirecTV and Echostar communications last year, claiming it would limit consumer choice.
What the FCC need to do is look at the monopoly of the cable systems in many communities. It's bad enough there is rampant price gouging. There isn't enough competition being fostered.
The cable companies need to shake in their boots. Perhaps with this (News Corp acquisition of DTV), there may be more competition and less price gouging. I can only hope. |
|
