[opendtv] Re: Minority and rural groups oppose FCC's plan to change cable TV rules
- From: "John Willkie" <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 10:46:28 -0800
The cable firms using rural groups in this this greenroots campaign is
particularly cynical. CABLE DOESN'T SERVE RURAL AREAS. If there are fewer
than 20 homes per route mile, cable won't even string the cable, and where
they do, prospects have to pay custom install fees to string the cable from
the road to their house.
Rural areas are served by satellite, and possibly in the future, by Telco
services. Yet, rural groups are being enlisted in this scam. Must be a lot
of money in play for them to ignore the fact that cable doesn't even serve
them.
(Ex-urban areas are another matter, but the 20 homes per route mile is still
a hard and fast limit. So, do the math. If the lots are wider than 528
feet along the road, cable is a no-go.
John Willkie
P.S. I've never seen a shopping channel in basic cable with the two systems
in San Diego. But, the city is quite vigilant about rates, and they have
fought off cable attempts to put a shopping channel into basic (as opposed
to extended basic.)
-----Mensaje original-----
De: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] En
nombre de Craig Birkmaier
Enviado el: Saturday, November 24, 2007 5:40 AM
Para: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Asunto: [opendtv] Re: Minority and rural groups oppose FCC's plan to change
cable TV rules
At 4:37 PM -0500 11/22/07, Albert Manfredi wrote:
>Craig Birkmaier wrote:
>
>> Why would ala carte result in the availability of less
>> channels?
>
>Simple. If each channel must pay for itself, there's no hope of
>stuffing a few frequencies with material of questionable general
>interest, like minority or other niche programming. The cable system
>would instead grab that bandwidth and use it for more lucrative
>purposes, such as VOD, HD simulcasts (for which they can charge
>extra), broadband Internet access, and telephone service.
Is this not more of a function of the marketplace? There may be
special interest groups (including minorities) that would gladly pay
a monthly fee to access this content. For example, why are there so
may religious broadcasters using both TV and radio spectrum? Clearly
they can generate enough revenue to operate stations and to create
content that they deliver by buying program time.
The real question is whether the cable networks can survive without
monthly subscriber fees, or risk a dramatic shrinkage in the number
of homes cleared, if they continue to charge subscriber fees. It is
my opinion that MANY of these channels would drop their subscriber
fees in a heartbeat, if faced with the reality that a multi-channel
subscriber would choose not to pay for their network.
The reality is that today the multi-channel systems are stuffed with
channels of questionable interest. IF you doubt this, look at the
channels available in the lifeline or limited basic packages from the
cable companies. They ALWAYS include one or two shopping channels.
The channel line-ups are based on the maximization of revenues for
both the content conglomerates and the multi--channel system
operators. Every channel has a "deal" associated with it. ANd in many
cases money flows to the multi-channel systems to get networks
started. We are currently hearing about the cash that the NFL network
is offering to cable to get carriage. The Fox News Network paid the
cable industry about $700 million to get carriage in the '90s. Now,
due to the popularity of this network, cable is collecting monthly
subscriber fees for them.
Ala carte is not going to make it more difficult to gain carriage for
niche networks. It could actually help them if they have a loyal base
of potential viewers willing to pay a monthly fee for a niche
channel. But my guess is that this is NOT the way it is going to play
out. Instead, I believe this niche content is going to go direct,
using the Internet to sell niche programming, cutting out the
middlemen, except for the cost of a broadband service.
>
>> The problem for minorities now is gaining access to distribution.
>
>The only hope for these special channels would be for them to be
>included in bundles, perhaps even mandated to be bundled among more
>general interest programming, by local governments. Just like other
>similar channels on cable systems are mandated.
Not true. They can pay for access now as they have in the past. The
real issue is whether there is enough of an audience to support a
24/7 network. With Internet downloads you only need to worry about
the content you are creating, and how to promote it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: