Mr. Dolan we don't want. . .

[graphiteRT]

Lets be realistic... 96 of these transponders are really no good, they can reach less than 1/3 the population... 157 could be used for the west coast, 166 and 175 are more AK/HI. 175 is like 15 degree elevation in LA.

More realistic numbers are:

SA=8 CONUS-48
D*=46 CONUS
V=11 CONUS-48 + 64 Extreame west coast AK/HI
E=50 CONUS + 11 CONUS-48 + 32 Western Half + 32 Western 1/3

Isn't 157 in hibernation?

I was reading a bit where Telsat is opening up their sats to US companies. Not sure all the impliations of that. The biggest problem is Voom has an installed based with Dishes already pointed to R1. A significant changeover requiring a realignment would be disasterous.

 

[graphiteRT]

You should consider it. You suggested that Mr Dolan makes makes statements to the FCC that would lead to Rainbow1 not being approved. He cannot make such statements.

JL

Wrong. I suggested that Dolan can show three viable satellite companies. There are two seperate but related issues. 1)Dolan can show the possibility of three viable DBS providers, something which CVC seems intent on killing. Who commands a more sympathetic ear with the gov't who's watching out for consumer interests? 2)The BoD has given him a green light to form some TBD entity which could bring together the satellite assets and the remaining Rainbow assets outside of CVC. They just want someone to cut them a check. In the end it won't matter who's signature is on the bottom.

Chuck doesn't have to directly do anything to squelch the E* deal. His intentions are already known to the Board, to his buddy Charlie at E*, to the SEC, the FCC and the public. What an agency decides on their own knowing that information is not something that he is liable for. If anything, with the facts we know today, CVC is looking pretty silly for just shutting out the lights and getting nothing when an offer of at least something is sitting on the table. The cancelation of the satellite contracts alone is substantial and I've seen nothing in SEC filings or PR that says those plans have been put on hold. So while this drama plays out, Lockheed is quietly working in the background on the next bird until told otherwise.

Chuck still holds the upper hand in many respects.

 

[HD_Eric]

My ignorant take

1) I agree that VOOM should MARKET to non-HDer's, however, I think their internal action should be focused on HD and making its HD customers most satisfied.

2) I would be happy if a few channels were added each month - no need for 200+ new at once if that is difficult for them.

3) A DVR is most critical. Cable has had an HD one for over a year and I had a DVR (PVR) with Dish Network 4-5 years ago..My wife is going to kill me if they don't add this soon. Do you guys know if there is an HD-TIVO and should I get this rather than waiting any longer?

4) While I am very happy with VOOM, especially its HD quality, I do have to say that a lot of the non-HD channels are not great looking (no matter what I use 1080i, 720p, native, etc.) Did someone say they USED to be and changed somehow?

5) If it helped, I would be willing to pay for the rest of the year upfront assuming they could guarantee service for the rest of the year...

 

[67Yv8t]

I'm not suggesting that more channels is a bad idea, I simply explained that focusing in getting new subs is more important than offering us current voomers added benefits right now.

WE are committed because as the service is right now we want to support it and hope it succeeds. Sure it can be better, but make it sure first, making it better will further stengthen it.

Simply: don't worry about us, we are behind you. AND we will stay as long as voom remains.

Once you get it turned around and the war is over, then make our retirement from the war a pleasant one.

 

[James Long]

There can be a fourth DBS company without it having DBS bandwidth. (Don't forget that there were three companies active before Voom started. Voom is number four.)

RainbowDBS has leased twice as much space on Rainbow2 than they have on Rainbow1, with the option to lease the entire 500MHz bandwidth for three times the space they have on Rainbow1. This and the conversion to hamonic encoders and eventually MPEG-4 make Rainbow2 a more viable place for Voom to continue service even if R1 remained an option. And the use of Rainbow2 is well within the Voom/RainbowDBS battle plan ... they planned to use it before the sale of Rainbow1 anyways. (Although in combination with R1.)

The FCC does not have to cancel the Rainbow1 license transfer for the Voom service to stay in business. E* promised to allow for a transition in the Satellite Sales Agreement, so unless Voom is slow in moving there should be no interruption of service. It is a workable deal.

However requiring RainbowDBS to keep R1 and lose the $200 million purchase price would be a financial hit on a struggling service. Would it be consumer friendly to forbid a company from shedding assets to clear debt? Not approving the transfer could kill Voom faster than approving the transfer.

So in keeping with the thread:

Mr Dolan,
Don't let people keep you in a box. Do whatever you can to keep the service running, even if it may be considered non-traditional.​

JL

 

[rocatman]

The FCC needs to wake up to the fact that DBS frequencies are not a necessity for a company to offer competitive satellite television service. In fact Voom, Dish and DirecTV all are using or have plans to use other frequencies to provide satellite television service. Its a given that all these other frequencies require the use of a larger dish and the DBS frequencies should be considered more valuable because a smaller dish can be used.

In the case of Voom, they already had near term plans to use Rainbow-2 (AMC-6), a Ku band satellite requiring about a 30" dish. Long term, Voom had already signed a contract to have built I believe 5 Ka band satellites. In addition, for the Rainbow-1 satellite, don't the Voom folks out on the west coast already need a larger dish (greater than the standard 18" dish) for adequate reception? If this is the case for Rainbow-1, it appears there is only a relatively minor advantage in providing CONUS television service using DBS versus Ku band.

DirecTV has spent over a billion dollars on Ka band satellites to provide what they have announced is a massive numbers of HD channels. Do you think after DirecTV deploys these satellites that the relatively small amount of DBS frequencies that they hold license to is going to be as valuable to them as it is today. I certainly doubt it.

Dish is already using Ku band at 105 and 121 W with another satellite, AMC-16 already on-orbit ready for use at 85 W. Dish has also been performing a huge amount of Ka band testing at the various orbital slots that Dish hold licenses. Dish also has Ku extended band licenses for a couple of other orbital locations.

The FCC has seen all this activity in the last 2 years related to providing satellite television service using frequencies other than DBS. Perhaps the FCC will wake up to the fact that the relative value of these DBS frequencies in comparison to the other useable frequencies is rapidly diminishing. In fact if a new company wanted to enter the satellite television market, the start up costs would be cheaper if that new company were to pursue these other frequencies since they are just awarded and not auctioned off by the FCC like the DBS frequencies.

 

[graphiteRT]

A casual side note, the 1500 channels that D* keeps harping on are nationwide. It's not like a single customer will have access to that many channels on his STB.

Hughes is shifting satellite usage away from broadband data and over to video. Those satellites were planned to go up anyway. The bidirectional data market hasn't panned out so they are making use of them for HDTV. It's not entirely accurate when they say they are suddenly spending all this money to support HD transmissions.

I'll look for the articles that discuss this issue. I believe it's on a networking related site.

 

[James Long]

A casual side note, the 1500 channels that D* keeps harping on are nationwide. It's not like a single customer will have access to that many channels on his STB.

Not legally, of course. It would also be hard to pick up several SpaceWay sats at the same time.

The point is that KuFSS and Ka satellites are not just for upstarts who couldn't get DBS space or feeder links to broadcast stations. The two largest DBS providers are turning to non-DBS bandwidth to expand their services - bringing ka and kuFSS into the mainstream of direct broadcast satellite to home service.

Dishes up to 1 meter are protected by the FCC. And the two major players have been off of the 18" dish kick for some time now. Customers are accepting of larger dishes if it gives them the signal they want.

There is nothing that says Voom can't survive a move to Rainbow2 (other than the same problems Voom is having on Rainbow1).

JL

 

[vurbano]

Jl and Boo fighting. I love it

 

[TheForce]

I'll just throw this out for comment-

FCC grants approval of the sale with the requirement that E* lease back current frequencies to Dolan's VOOM llc assuming he is successful in acquiring that business from CVC until such time as Dolan's VOOM LLc is able to make the transition to the new satellite licenses currently planned.

FCC grants approval for the sale with the requirement that E* reserve sufficient TP bandwidth for its expansion of all premium HDTV channels currently offered by VOOM and carriage of all of VOOM's exclusive HDTV channels should VOOM make that programming available to E*. ( obviously- proper wording to include non-price gouging such as similarly priced services should prevent E* from claiming they are being forced to buy something that is overpriced by VOOM.)


I don't know how far the FCC can go with the above "conditions" legally as in their authority but was mainly interested in the concept and your thoughts. MY idea here is to keep the subscriber first, so that he will not lose the programming that is now available. As was stated earlier, the FCC represents us and any action that takes away our programming we now have in the interest of helping increase the profitability of a particular company like E* is not keeping within that philosophy. Therefore I proposed the above so the sale could be approved and guarantee no loss of available programming.

 

[The Stone Man]

Don--My comment on your proposed resolution would be 'good one'. Everybody wins in the end (even the FCC). And the after-effect would make E* the HD leader, giving incentive to D* to improve on what they offer. I don't see how that could be bad.