The FCC originally wanted all providers to adhere to the "cable card standard". But for some reason (political payoffs), the telcos and satcos got out of it. As far as government interference in business, the satcos need FCC permission to do anything at all with their satellites. Requiring them to offer a way for consumers to use their own equipment at minimal costs isn't asking that much, considering how much money they make using the public airwaves.
Retailer Chat Recap - 1/14/2014
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 145
- Views 22K
And decisions are made by people who have no idea about anything other than who is donating to their campaigns. On the other hand we all know if the government excercises more control, in the end it will work better and cost less. I would predict, the average family's satellite bill will go down and if they like their satellite plan they can keep their satellite plan.
If someone can justify having eight televisions, they can surely justify providing each of them with programming. I find the concept of individual viewing to be a disturbing trend. I developed this theory when sitting with my sister's family where each spends their time together on a different iDevice doing their own thing and rarely a word is said.
I hope that TVs can get a lot cheaper than they are.
I'm pretty sure that FIOS (both Verizon and Frontier) still uses CableCard (and will continue to do so until they abandon QAM).
If CableCard could gracefully handle over 1,000 channels, there might be an argument to support using something like CableCard for satellite. I don't think CableCard was designed to handle the entirety of national television. Having to turn each receiver (or each home install) into a head end for a QAM cable system would be insanely expensive.
Whatever model is chosen needs to be able to cover all the distribution format bases or they've substantially failed before they've started.
That's divided government. That's what the people wanted when they voted. How you like it now?
Government regulation of cable companies can be somewhat justified by the "utility" model. A consumer is likely to be bound by the physical infrastructure in choosing a provider. Satellite companies have no such power over customers. They offer a product for sale that you can buy or not buy. Their pricing model should be none of the Government's business. A merger between Dish and DirecTV might just open that door to additional interference in our lives.
If you are paying $150 a month with multiple TVs, and are demanding lower cost per TV, you are simply, selfishly, demanding that customers with fewer TVs subsidize your viewing. The satellite company needs to make a profit. The total cost for all customers still needs to be the same.
If you are paying $150 a month with multiple TVs, and are demanding lower cost per TV, you are simply, selfishly, demanding that customers with fewer TVs subsidize your viewing. The satellite company needs to make a profit. The total cost for all customers still needs to be the same.
So in a way, DISH is for families watching tv together on ONE tv like in the 50s. That's why they keep forcing higher and higher prices on all the additional receivers like the $17.00 vip dvr or the $12.00 extra hopper fee. They are penalizing all of those who watch tv in different rooms in their house, by forcing even higher fees on additional receivers . They are doing it for the "Families".
The real problem is that programming is a monopoly and your only choice is to choose the retailer to buy it from. You can choose to buy your channel from your cable company, phone company or DBS company, but you are stuck buying the programming, usually in a large block form filled with channels you do not watch.
This whole $7 per month for a virtual Joey reminds me of the cell phone industry now and the whole T-Mobile "uncarrier".
In short, T-Mobile's big argument:
"If I have paid for my device, then I should pay cheaper rates."
By purchasing a TV with a VJ ... are you not bringing your "own device" to the network and hence should you not be eligible for a cheaper rate?
Perhaps we need an "unsatellite" initiative
Edit:
Apparently with a VJ ... Dish will send you a remote for free. I say make folks pay for the remote and charge a $4 access fee.
In short, T-Mobile's big argument:
"If I have paid for my device, then I should pay cheaper rates."
By purchasing a TV with a VJ ... are you not bringing your "own device" to the network and hence should you not be eligible for a cheaper rate?
Perhaps we need an "unsatellite" initiative
Edit:
Apparently with a VJ ... Dish will send you a remote for free. I say make folks pay for the remote and charge a $4 access fee.
The bad side is the Tivo 6 Tuner do not have the OTA option, making a investment for only cable subscriber, the 2 tuner is swap between CTV and OTA.
Yes or at most $1 or 2 per month because it is an APP!! Minimal maintenance costs and saves Dish a ton $$ not manufacturing hardware and not replacing defective Joeys.
The added convenience of using the smart TV app where a Joey has not been installed. However, it is a rip at $7 per month. It ought to start at most at $1 or so to cover greatly REDUCED cost because it is an APP and Dish may have to pay a bit to be on the TV's., but Dish save a ton of $$ not having to manufacture hardware nor have to replace defective Joeys. It's clear: MSO's are making up for the cost of programming by increasing FEES.
If they didn't charge it here, they'd charge it somewhere else. They've got to make decisions on how to best prosper. And they have a lot more data at their disposal to make such decisions than us.
Stop thinking of Dish charging for the app, they are NOT charging for the app. The app is free and you are paying an access fee just like you do with any other receiver. You never have been paying for any physical device, you have only been paying for programming access to your TVs. If you do not want to pay a fee then just mirror off of another receiver.
So what does the programming fee cover?
Posted Via The FREE SatelliteGuys Reader App!
As I said I would call it a Programming Mirroring Fee and be done with it.
I predict that for people who do opt for the Virtual Joey that it will be their least used receiver in their house. It will be nice to have there when you need it but otherwise you won't use it.
I predict that for people who do opt for the Virtual Joey that it will be their least used receiver in their house. It will be nice to have there when you need it but otherwise you won't use it.
It is important to many of us that we aren't subsidizing something that we aren't getting. I say that realizing that SD customers are heavily subsidizing my viewing habits.
That's not true or all the equipment fees would be the same flat rate. Clearly, they are not (best example is the VIP DUOs that had basic receiver fee, DVR fee, and second outlet fee rolled into one $17 fee a few years back).
The difference with apps is that they typically have a smaller viewing audience (collectively) than a conventional receiver. Surely some will be driving TVs, but others will be rendering on smaller devices where the portable media content isn't up to the task.
Similar threads
