[opendtv] Re: Controversial VMAs puts fresh spotlight on the
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 08:09:27 -0400
On Sep 7, 2013, at 7:38 PM, Albert Manfredi <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Exactly! These are all HEAVILY regulated utilities, and they are so for a
> darned good reason. They cannot compete adequately, in any given location.
> You won't get multiple sewer and water pipes through every neighborhood,
> Craig. Or power lines. EVEN IF different organizations theoretically can
> share the infrastructure, that monopolistic element can't be escaped. The
> actual physical infrastructure.
Physical infrastructure can be and is shared. Cox Cable and AT&T both share the
utility poles in my neighborhood. And AT&T has fiber buried in my front yard.
Cox and AT&T compete in the wired telco and broadband businesses, and AT&T
could compete with Uverse if they want to light up that fiber.
The electric grid is shared. In many states you can buy power from multiple
suppliers (this is more common for larger industrial users).
The monopolistic element CAN be escaped. It IS NOT because it is more
profitable for corporations and public utilities to push the kool-aid that
these are "natural monopolies."
> Yet, these are necessities. So, now you're proposing that the government
> start regulating MVPDs the same way? First and foremost on the monthly fees
> they can charge, and on the standards they must support? Wow. Okay. Odd,
> though, that you would support government regulation to protect the masses
> from spending too much on mere entertainment!
Unbelievable.
The entire previous message was intended to explain that the politicians DO
regulate broadcasters and the MVPDs in the SAME way. Cox cable in Gainesville
is regulated by a local franchise board, and to a lesser extent by the State
and the FCC.
I DON'T support the natural monopoly scam, nor do I believe that various
government entities should be able to collect more than $12/mo from me for
regulating this service.
>
>> Clearly the level of pain is not sufficient to cause more than 80% of
>> U.S. homes to change their behavior.
>
> That's correct. That's how the free market is supposed to work. For something
> as frivolous as entertainment, never mind that most people now have access to
> at least a couple of MVPDs, you don't need any heavy-handed government
> regulation. You let the market forces take care of themselves. And exactly as
> you say, the pain is apparently not sufficient. So the MVPDs can ask for
> more, and get it. (Although they are reaching their limit for an increasing
> number of consumers.)
Yes. Most homes do have access to 2 - 4 MVPD services. But they are all
regulated and heavily taxed, and there is no real competition. They all pay
subscriber fees to the media oligopoly, and taxes to the governments that
regulate them. This is the essential essence of how oligopolies operate; they
could not do this without the explicit support of the regulators and the
judicial branch, which allows the oligopolies to exist.
>> Likewise, if the politicians and regulators choose NOT to apply laws
>> and regulations equally, or worse, they put in place laws and
>> regulations that encourage monopolistic behavior,
>
> Let's see. We still have FOTA TV.
A government regulated oligopoly that pays very little for the use of a
valuable public resource - spectrum.
> The government prevented Dish and DirecTV from merging.
For now.
> The government allowed Verizon FiOS to compete as a new cabled MVPD.
And U-verse, and the occasional government owned cable overbuild. Just part of
the scam, to provide the appearance of competition. Hey look - you have two to
three choices that all cost about the same; isn't "competition great!
Scheeeeeeze
> The government allows the TV networks to run FOTI web sites
To be fair they do not prevent this; but this IS NOT competition because you
cannot access the most valuable content in the bundles, or can only access it
on a delayed basis.
> . The government is allowing web sites to act as MVPDs, to have access to the
> same content as MVPDs.
NOT YET. And if the FCC does extend the equal access rules to Internet MVPDs,
it is highly likely that they will not compete either.
> I don't see any encouragement of monopolistic behavior by the government.
FOTFL
> Addicts feed the system. Entertainment is not like power and water.
NO BERT. Demand feeds the system. When demand intersects with regulation you
get monopolies or oligopolies, and government greed (taxes and fees).
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts: