Managed obscurity?

[RedSavina]

I think I had one of those "Ah-ha!" moments today. I was puzzled reading some comments in another thread that suggested disinterest in the FTA hobby growing much. This was a real head-scratcher for me, especially in light of the friendly and helpful folks here in the FTA forums.

After pondering it for a while, I think I have a better grasp of the issue. Apparently, there is fear that if the hobby grows too much we will see a loss of programming. This is certainly understandable and has been demonstrated time and time again when someone blurts info about an open feed, only to see the programming get encrypted shortly thereafter. At the same time it is a little sad, too.

So as I come to terms with the concept of keeping FTA (as a whole) on the down-low, it occurs to me that it will be increasingly less likely to see new features in FTA equipment. In the recent past, several manufacturers were driven by market demand for features that enabled illegal viewing of programming. In some cases, these features were also desirable for legitimate FTA viewing, so we benefited indirectly from the illegal activity. Now that the market for signal thieves is drying up, the future of new features coming to FTA equipment seems rather bleak. The business case becomes pretty difficult without raising prices dramatically due to the relatively small user base.

Will we see the North American receivers become extinct? Will we have to start relying more on the European market models for new features?

It strikes me as a difficult situation to balance a large enough market to drive demand for products while also remaining small enough to escape unwanted notice. Please, enlighten me on where I have hit/missed the mark or other thoughts on the relative obscurity of the FTA hobby.

Regards,
Red

 

[1ADAM12]

Sounds right to me. One manufacturer after another will dry up. Cost of receivers on eBay will skyrocket after the glut of pirate receivers dies off.

 

[chapelrun]

I liked the way you said this...

I been thinking about this too - - - I guess from a diffent angle.

I recently deleted all the channels from my setup that I never watch - - - many channels from 97W and others that I don't ever even stop at. When I had finished, I still had 100 channels. This was interesting to me as I did keep some Non-English channels but I only speak english. I think FTA is safe for the time being, but I can envision a day when maybe FTA will be hard to find. I do see one exception though - - - I think there will always be religious channels that are FTA. I think that is a good thing.

My entire setup is currently 3 dishes (2 fixed, 1 motorized) and 1 receiver - - - KU only (from 72W to 125W). Alot of the joy I get out of this hobby is fiddling and figuring out new stuff. I would love to have a C Band setup and one day I think I will but to me a big part of the fun is figuring it out and when you get stuck you come ask here.

I would love to have a new AZ Box but have decided my current receiver is "just fine" for now. (meaning, I'm still having a bunch of fun with it)

Long live FTA!

 

[turbosat]

I doubt it goes away, I've had satellite tv since the late 80's and while it goes through evolution, as in the changeover from analog to DVB, the amount of channels doesn't seem to have dropped much. Now, the availability of pay-tv channels served direct-to-home has dropped way way down, mostly due to people accepting 'easy' over choice (Dish and Direct). If the 4DTV system had taken off, kept the subscription numbers high enough for programmers to notice, I think we would have much more programming sold directly to us, rather than through cable or 'cable on a stick'. Talking about it probably doesn't hurt the hobby, but hoping for addressable receivers that will give home viewers great packages or channel choices is useless. We're up against the big boys who have, for now, cornered the market.

 

[RedSavina]

Talking about it probably doesn't hurt the hobby, but hoping for addressable receivers that will give home viewers great packages or channel choices is useless. We're up against the big boys who have, for now, cornered the market.

By your comments, I see that you think FTA subscription services (similar to Europe) are virtually impossible. I would have to agree. When you refer to the "big boys" do you mean the channel providers (ESPN, Disney, and other conglomerates) or the distributors (cable cos, telcos, 18" satcos)? We often blame companies like Dish and DirecTV, but it seems more like the programmers are at fault for requiring carriage of channel packages.

I was excited when Skyvision offered the 410 Ku subscription service a couple of years ago. That sure didn't last long! I suspect the programming providers had something to do with that, but that's just my Oliver Stone nerve (conspiracy) working overtime!

I, for one, attempt to vote with my wallet and have kept my paid programming choices pretty minimal for a long time. 4DTV hardware costs and availability notwithstanding, I would love to drop the service I have for better package choices and costs. It will be a number of years before I "settle down" from military life, so I am limited to 1m dishes or smaller for now. Since Ku is not likely to offer subscription services in my lifetime, I can only hope that 4DTV or something similar is still available in a few years. In the interim, I can only hope my absoluteHD does not go away as I am not willing to pay the ever-increasing prices for the other programming packages.

But, I digress. Thanks for your response.

Cheers,
Red

 

[turbosat]

Red by the 'big boys' in this case I meant the pay-tv -on satellite-companies. Look what happened to Primestar, Voom, anybody else that comes along gets bought off by one of the big 2 so there is effectively no competition in satellite delivered, direct to home service. (unless you want to try sneaking in a Canadian service using a fake address).
There might come a time when a new business starts up a subscription service to America, using the fta type equipment and encryption/decryption methods as in Europe, but I doubt it's going to be anytime soon. The movie studios and other programming providers seem to have set numbers in mind when it comes to audiences willing to pay for their wares, the cable giants and direct-to-home services that exist now can provide those numbers without fearing any loss to new technologies in the good ol USA. It's just my opinion...

 

[colbec]

Some interesting thoughts here. If I am reading correctly there are concerns about a) availability of programming, b) availability of receivers, and c) ongoing improvement in features on hardware.

I see the advent of extremely-difficult-to-crack encryption as good. May I ask whether there has been any decrease in the nag spots that accuse people of signal stealing? Have there been any recent prosecutions for signal theft? As the broadcast distribution undertakings gain confidence in their new protection perhaps they will relax the FUD related to FTA - for some reason there are many who think FTA means Free to steal. If encryption holds up that will not longer be true and they cannot claim so.

If we as an FTA community had an industry organization, one of our goals should be to re-establish what FTA really means. And eventually we might just get the support of the BDUs to do that?

Until it is clear in the mind of the general public what FTA is about, FTA broadcasting will be tentative and subject to change. And retail availabiltiy of receivers will be subject to the same uncertainty. Business is dealing with enough uncertainty as it is. I know of one retailer who wants to drop receivers altogether and confine his interest to components only.

Undoubtedly the market for new receivers will initially shrink as the existing stock gets redistributed from people who don't want them any more to those who can use them. But at the same time a core of interest will survive to serve the ongoing market. It may get down to PCI/USB components but this might be good in the long run. As long as there are components, there will be receivers.

In addition to religous broadcasting there are many other interests that are using FTA (even if it is to broadcast propaganda). More to the point there are others who should be using FTA but are not, perhaps due to fear of alienating the BDUs (as discussed in other threads). A clear concept of FTA would help this situation.

Suggestion: new concept label => Open Source Satellite Programming replaces FTA. The concept of open source has been pretty well beaten about in the courts and is still with us. It is well established that the underlying material is available to you to use but it comes with strings (license) and you don't violate those rules. Flight of fancy?

 

[zamar23]

There is fear that if the hobby grows too much we will see a loss of programming... It occurs to me that it will be increasingly less likely to see new features in FTA equipment. In the recent past, several manufacturers were driven by market demand for features that enabled illegal viewing of programming... Now that the market for signal thieves is drying up, the future of new features coming to FTA equipment seems rather bleak.... Will we see the North American receivers become extinct?

Some say that signal theft market is evolving, not drying up. But it may require ongoing equipment upgrade from viewers as signal protection techniques will keep advancing, hence lower demand and volume of sales may reflect that. Signal theft however is not the only or even major factor in STB advances, since most such viewers prefer "Easy Button" and min features anyway.

Broadcast technology advances like IPTV are affecting STB evolution a lot more. As low cost high bandwidth availability will become prevalent in major cities, we may observe major sat broadcasters start offering and shifting focus to IPTV services, like largest phone companies did, selling now mostly VOIP and Cellphone services instead of traditional land lines. Hence Linux multimedia STBs with multiple tuners and advanced video processors and HTPCs will steadily grow in demand, and we'll see a much larger influx of new systems and features than sat signal theft money could ever deliver. It will of course affect business models of content delivery to end users. As internet always tend to do, such models will become more diverse and democratic over the time, and will present challenge to current 2 dominant broadcasters / little competition system for sure. Sat broadcast will remain dominant in less accessible geographic areas with low population density.

I'm sure, the future of watching free or low cost TV content is brighter than some may think at the moment. But technology and equipment required for that will evolve over time.

 

[JAS]

This will not help the hobby.

Broadcasters' woes could spell trouble for free TV - Yahoo! News

 

[zamar23]

While that article emphasizes ad revenue drop from network broadcasts, and predicts network shift to cable from affiliate model, the reality in many largest cities is notable viewers shift to OTA from Cable and Sat pay services, followed by high demand for OTA Gear. On top, traditional industry analysts may underestimate the speed of cash flow sources change as wired and wireless internet broadband capacity increases. Also I don't see in that article any analysis of new revenue streams, mobile and IPTV will deliver over time. Neither technical equipment trends review is offered there, while everyone knows technology level determines business models exploited at any point of time in history.

 

[Corrado]

As far as I'm concerned, I'll never pay for programming I don't watch. One of the things I enjoy about my 4DTV is choice, second is value. Many channels available ala carte or in packages that I can pick my channels. I don't need 500 channels. I bet it's more like 2 dozen I watch because I want them, not because I'm limited to them. No need to sub to 50 channels I'll never watch to get one.

Sometimes, I think I spend more time hunting down programming and tinkering with this equipment than I spend watching it.

 

[pedrogarcia]

I'm with you Corrado and I wish many more of the US thought this way it might encourage the distributors to produce more reasonably priced packages with channels people want to watch. Why not give customers their choice of channels, it is not rocket science to code the cards.
I also think there will be a migration of terrestial channels to satellite FTA to cut their broadcast and maintenance costs