[opendtv] Re: Why aren't there more converter boxes?
- From: "Dale Kelly" <dalekelly@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 14:15:25 -0800
Craig, I should also add that Cable in not simply a benign enabler for
broadcasting; they compete in the local and national advertising markets
directly against the broadcaster who's signals they carry. As you are likely
aware, cable also imports significant amounts of advertiser supported
programming and they also sell advertising in local markets to insert into
that programming - and, they also charge the customer for the tier
containing that programming.
Additionally, they also charge a hefty fee for their HDTV tiers, which often
contains local station HDTV programming.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Dale Kelly
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 12:51 PM
> To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [opendtv] Re: Why aren't there more converter boxes?
>
>
>
>
> Reply Interlineated:
>
> > How do you justify the notion that cable companies make significant
> > income from the carriage of broadcast stations?
>
> Regardless of what you may think, many broadcasters bring a significant
> number of cable viewers to the table, which is often illustrated by the
> customer uproar each time one of these stations is removed from a cable
> system.
>
> > Do they charge a fee for local stations as do the DBS companies?
>
> As I recall, cable companies are required to offer a Basic
> program tier made
> up of the local broadcast programs. They generally do not advertise it's
> availability but when pressed, they must provide it - for a price. It is
> difficult to quantify it's actual value to cable but it is a fact
> that they
> built their businesses on the back of the broadcast signals.
>
>
> > The cable companies have also invested at least twice in building out
> > their physical plants, and the cost of this infrastructure is an
> > order of magnitude grater than what broadcasters have spent on their
> > infrastructure (i.e. in excess of 150 billion in the past two
> > decades). Much of what we pay for each month in our cable bills is to
> > pay for this infrastructure.
>
> Yes, and Cable passed their cost on to the customer, with a
> markup. There is
> an ROI for that construction, unlike the broadcaster, who's investment to
> construct the DTV system was government mandated and simply
> allowed them to
> stay in business. The ROI for the broadcaster DTV system
> investment accrued
> to the CE manufacturers.
>
>
> > There is NOTHING to prevent broadcasters from forming a private
> > corporation to operate the transmission infrastructure as is the
> > case in the U.K. And broadcasters already pay a hefty price to
> > operate that infrastructure - primarily via their electric bills.
>
> Please refer to my posting yesterday on this subject. There
> simply can be no
> apples to apples comparison with the UK model.
> Freeview uses exiting infrastructure with little or no capital
> investment on
> their part.
>
> Dale
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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.
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: