Problably CES time or around then, considering all new announcements are usually made around that time.
Posted Via The FREE SatelliteGuys Reader App!
Posted Via The FREE SatelliteGuys Reader App!
Dish Files FCC Appication to Launch Echostar 18
- Thread starter nelson61
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 77
- Views 10K
If you look on page 6 of the FCC narrative, footnote 16, it states that Dish and DirecTV entered into a coordination agreement for the 110 W location on September 12, 2014. Obviously we don't know the details of that agreement but it does confirm there was an agreement.
I don't want to see a single 4K channel go up until the full-time HD RSNs are complete.
I don't want to see a single 4k channel go up till they give me HD Tv land channel. 
I think you missed the point of my post: the way Dish uses its WA, 110 is the one slot that benifits most from improvements in DBS technology and those advancements occur just a few years after launch. The benifit is maximum use of its bandwidth at 110 and since 110 is the primary LIL spotbeam slot for Dish WA, meaning the huge burden of more TV channels at 110 than any other slot, Dish is wise to use the latest advancements in more power for more spots or other advancements. That is why 110 sees more replacements than other WA slots. Dish can use, by design, the sats replaced at 110 in other slots in a dfferent configuration for best use at the new slot to spend its remaining life or as critical backup at 110.
I suppose an anolgy is why the airlines go into debt to buy new airplanes when their current fleet isn't that old and still has decades of life in them: because the latest ailiners, even the latest/newest versions of venerable models, are CHEAPER to operate and maintain. Even with the debt, what the airlines get in greater efficiency of the new airliners results in making more money than if they just used their old planes. The key word is EFFICIENCY, and Dish keeps replacing satellites at 110 for more EFFICEINT ones, and they just move what was there somewhere else for use or backup, and because of the heavy demands at 110, that slot needs to be the most efficient operating slot.
Last edited:
Usually such coordination is about avoiding interference or making less likely any of the RF uplinks access or interefere with each other. Such coordination is common on all sats that share slots and using different xpndrs on the same slot. Also issues about moving sats that share the same slot best worked out as a protocol in the coordination agrerment means less likelihood of accidents or interference, which would also address how Dish will move the new sat in and where the sat it replaces will park as backup so DiecTV knows where NOT to move its sat and collide and will aporise the other of sat movements and when and where so they don't do such things at the same time. Further, both would adresss an agreement of spotbeam assignments at 110 so neither Interferes with the other even if DircTV has no plans for spots there. DirecTV wants to protect the bandwidth it has at 110 for a variety of possible usex, while still strategically denying Dish additional bandwidth. None of this means DircTV is giving up its xpndrs for Dish to use.
Dish or DirecTV interfering with itself does not concern the FCC so much because in cases where the is only one operator of the sat location in the same band, they can take immediate corrective measurex. But when a sat slot is shared by more than one operator, corrective measures are best handled by cooperation among the operators. The FCC wants the operators to work out a coordination agreement so that it minimizes problems among all the operators of the sat and they have all worked out plans and they will they will communicate with each other if problems due occur
bobvick said:
Maybe a transponder swap to assign the 3 transponders from 110 to 119. However, I doubt Directv will ever give up bandwidth to benefit Dish.
Besides Dish has plenty of bandwidth, so it's not like Dish would be sitting there like a kid with no candy.
dishrich said:They just might, in order for the approval for their purchase by AT&T...
Dish has more bandwidth than I believe directv and Att combined.
You don't give someone who has more, more.
I don't want to see a single 4k channel go up till they give me HD Tv land channel.
I don't want to see a single 4K channel go up until someone buys me a 4K TV.
But you really don't know this for a fact...& what DOES this have to do with the largest telco sucking up the largest sat co???
You DO when the largest phone co is trying to suck YOU, the largest satellite co, up. And since DirecTV (US) is NOT even utilizing those 110 x-ponders f/US service anymore, it's a small consolation for the ultimate prize. FYI, I was actually ONLY talking about those 3 110 x-ponders anyway; D* really can't give up their 119 slots, due to all the US prog they currently carry on them now.
I think a lot of DISH's spotbeams are duplicated on both arcs. I realize that they are trying to appeal to a sub who may not have the right sat site for their home. IF you can't see western arc, you may see eastern arc. But it seems to me that all this duplication is a little wasteful. So is the western arc not being all mpeg 4 yet. Since 08, they have had eastern arc as all mpeg 4, they should of been doing upgrades for FREE, with 2 year commitments to upgrade all older subs to mpeg 4 receivers on western arc , so they could reclaim the bandwith. IF they didn't charge for HD and they upgraded everyone to hd mpeg 4 receivers , they could do away with all the SD channels that have HD equivalents. Do away with using duplicate arcs and spotbeams , you could have more space for more hd channels and eventually 4k if you chose to do that. Then do away with all old receivers and get down to just one or two classes of receivers, say the hoppers and the Vip receivers and you could do away with supporting all those older receiver class and software maintenance, refurbs , etc. Streamline the entire operation and save money over the long run. Yes, you have to spend a little money upfront to make or save more money down the line or long term planning.
I thought Verizon was the largest telco, in numbers of customers, size, and as far as value, of greater value and deeper pockets. Verizon certainly, and easily, larger company with more revenue and higher value and lot more money. But I also thought Verizon was largest Telco, as well. Do correct me on that.
Well as far as "telco" (local dialtone) size, considering Verizon sold off a LOT of it's services areas to Frontier, I would be VERY surprised if this is still the case; though Verizon's remaining services areas are in large metro areas...as opposed to the more rural areas that they were happy to off-load to Frontier.
But as far as other services (ie: wireless, long distance networking, etc.) I believe AT&T would still be the larger of the 2...but let's assume this is not the case - you WOULD agree that if nothing else, AT&T IS a very close 2nd to Verizon, no?
So what I was trying to explain to Claude...AT&T is still a BIG dog, trying to purchase THE largest sat company in the US - hence my reasoning why DirecTV might be willing to part w/3 measly x-ponders, to get approval for their mega-merger.
Well as far as "telco" (local dialtone) size, considering Verizon sold off a LOT of it's services areas to Frontier, I would be VERY surprised if this is still the case; though Verizon's remaining services areas are in large metro areas...as opposed to the more rural areas that they were happy to off-load to Frontier.
But as far as other services (ie: wireless, long distance networking, etc.) I believe AT&T would still be the larger of the 2...but let's assume this is not the case - you WOULD agree that if nothing else, AT&T IS a very close 2nd to Verizon, no?
So what I was trying to explain to Claude...AT&T is still a BIG dog, trying to purchase THE largest sat company in the US - hence my reasoning why DirecTV might be willing to part w/3 measly x-ponders, to get approval for their mega-merger.
OK, I get your point. AT&T is, indeed much larger than Dish who is always the small fry among the giants. Verizon has been a larger company than AT&T for a long time, and this was confirmed by many press reports during the AT&T/DirecTV acquisition in stories profiling all the telco and DBS companies. Also, confirmed at Wikipedia, if we are to believe Wikipedia.
Most of the numbers are very similar between AT&T and Verizon, but the numbers that really count and put Verizon far ahead of AT&T is the stock price: Verizon is the far more valued and valuable company with greater financing capability than AT&T and more $$$ to play in the world of high finance and acquisitions on that respect. Verizon is a "larger" company to AT&T.
Outside of numbers, Verizon operates both a superior performing MVPD and cellular telephone network which probably helps the stock price as in investors having more confidence in and see greater value in the company. It would take a whole lot more money for someone to acquire the more valued Verizon than the relative bargain of AT&T, along with AT&T's its inferior services.
Last edited:
It would be SUPER if they would go ahead and put the HD's from 129 over to 110. You wouldn't need to upgrade anyone with a wing dish or a 1k2 kit from those that already have a Dish500 not to mention the 110 sat is much higher in elevation. Can't tell you how many times I've not been able to upgrade someone to HD with the 129 since locals are on it when they should have HD locals on 110 cause of whatever reason, mostly tree's. This would solve so much and make the over all costs of upgrading someone almost nothing as you can just walk in and change receiver and walk out.
You do if you want to get the deal approved.
Looks like what I have been mentioning for the past few months in the pub is coming true.
