# Congratulations Charlie



## bogi (Apr 3, 2002)

Unfortunately money wins in our government and with the merger approval of ATT and Comcast, Echostar-DirectTv is a sure thing.

http://philadelphia.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/stories/2002/09/16/daily11.html

Comcast-AT&T Broadband deal OK'd by FTC

Comcast Corp. announced Tuesday the Federal Trade Commission has granted antitrust approval to its proposed deal to buy AT&T Corp.'s cable unit, clearing another hurdle in creating the country's largest cable company

George Orwell was right but the year should of been 2084.


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

Sure thing? It helps but......


----------



## Rusty (Apr 26, 2002)

Echostar-DirecTV is absolutely not a sure thing.


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

It's not a sure thing until the announcements from both DOJ and the FCC.


----------



## invaliduser88 (Apr 23, 2002)

When will the decision finally be made? This thing seems to be dragging on forever!


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

A decision is expected by the end of this month to the middle of October. Should be real soon.

See ya
Tony


----------



## bogi (Apr 3, 2002)

> _Originally posted by scooper _
> *It's not a sure thing until the announcements from both DOJ and the FCC. *


The FTC is the DOJ. And everyone here knows the Chairman of the FCC is a corprate lap dog. So ATT COMAST is as good as gold.

This makes way for sattellite to be approved because the merger with dish and dtv will equal the merger with att comcast.


----------



## Curtis0620 (Apr 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by bogi _
> *
> 
> The FTC is the DOJ. And everyone here knows the Chairman of the FCC is a corprate lap dog. So ATT COMAST is as good as gold.
> ...


ATT and Comcast do not compete for customers. E* and D* do.
That is the big difference here.

Kill the merger.


----------



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

The AT&T deal was NOT approved by the DOJ, they used a loophole which approved the deal because the DOJ took too long.

I am suprised that Dish Network has not used this loophole to get their merger approved.

With the AT&T deal going past the DOJ, it does appear more likely that the Dish / DirecTV deal will get approved just to compete with the new giant made with AT&T and Comcast.


----------



## Curtis0620 (Apr 22, 2002)

If the Dish/Directv merger goes through here is my prediction of what to expect:

PVR fees for all of $10 per month for each PVR
Downgrade fees of $5
Mirroring fees of at least $5.99
Locals $10

All to pay for the merger, and because cable is the only competition (at least in most parts of the country).


If cable gets NFLST, DBS will die a slow death.


----------



## David_Levin (Apr 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Scott Greczkowski _
> *The AT&T deal was NOT approved by the DOJ, they used a loophole which approved the deal because the DOJ took too long.
> 
> I am suprised that Dish Network has not used this loophole to get their merger approved.
> ...


But the DOJ must have known this would happen. They did essentially approve it.


----------



## Win Joy Jr (Apr 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by David_Levin _
> *
> 
> But the DOJ must have known this would happen. They did essentially approve it. *


I look at this as more of as the DOJ did not WANT to rule, so they punted.

Now, will they do the same for the DirecTV / E* deal, who knows.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

As is the case now, a merged E*/D* will still have to compete with cable in most areas of the country. National DBS pricing will protect the rural subs and put them on equal footing with urban/suburban subs.

I welcome the merger and, with certain economies of scale, I look forward to new and exciting things happening with DBS in the future.


----------



## Guest (Sep 19, 2002)

Does AT&T and Comcast compete in any relevant geographic market against each other?

The procedures of the Hart Scott Rodino Act govern the timing of any action to be taken by DOJ or themerging parties. There is no loophole.


----------



## bogi (Apr 3, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Clayton7 _
> *Does AT&T and Comcast compete in any relevant geographic market against each other?.*


Nope, They are Monopolies.


----------



## BrettR (Apr 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Curtis0620 _
> *If the Dish/Directv merger goes through here is my prediction of what to expect:
> 
> PVR fees for all of $10 per month for each PVR
> ...


The New DirecTV would have to replace our equipment with equivalent at no charge to us. A dual tuner PVR with lifetime service would have to replaced with equivalent. If not, I'd be calling my lawyer.


----------



## bogi (Apr 3, 2002)

Maybe I spoke to soon..


----------



## Tim (Apr 24, 2002)

> The New DirecTV would have to replace our equipment with equivalent at no charge to us. A dual tuner PVR with lifetime service would have to replaced with equivalent. If not, I'd be calling my lawyer.


And your lawyer would gladly take your money while saying there's nothing in your customer agreement that guarantees anything close to what you are looking for


----------



## BrettR (Apr 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Tim _
> *
> 
> there's nothing in your customer agreement that guarantees anything close to what you are looking for  *


Thats incorrect. Echostar DirecTV would be acquiring all contracts they have made with each subscriber. When the successor corporation [from a merger] is sued on an inherited liability, it cannot raise the defense that the plaintiff did not have a contract with it. From Anderson's Business Law and the Legal Environment.

DirecTV, Hughes the obligor is the party who makes a promise. And the promise given to the customer is lifetime service for PVR functions for a unit that receives DirecTV programming. Echostar would have to honor this contract. A breach of contract is the failure to act or perform in the manner called by the contract. Echostar and DirecTV do say programming and pricing subject to change without notice (even though they usually give advance notice if channel is being dropped, like PAX on DirecTV). However PVR functions are not programming. A PVR without fees (either lifetime service or no fee to begin as cost was included with purchase of box) would have to be replaced with a PVR without PVR fees. I dont see how this is so hard to see. If Charlie pulls a stunt like charging former lifetime users, I be frustrated. And the chances of merger dont seem so bright anyways as there are serious antitrust implications.

However antitrust laws are being disregarded in some cases already. Some of those laws were obsolete. The networks who are making profits on advertising and want to protect commercial advertising might pay off the right parties in Congress which might lead to eventual killing of the PVR anyways. NBC though has a stake in TiVo IIRC though. Cant imagine NBC though who is paying lots of money to Warner B for Friends West Wing ER isnt at all concerned if large numbers of viewers ignore the advertising NBC is making money off of. A loss of PVR would not be good for the satellite provider as the integrated PVR was a huge advantage over parochial outdated cable systems.


----------



## Tim (Apr 24, 2002)

What does the phrase *Pricing, terms and conditions subject to change* at the bottom of the DirecTivo pricing page do to your contract?

I'm not sure how you can differentiate the PVR service from any other service provided that is governed by the T&C.

Brett I'm not disagreeing with your general point here, but this does seem like a "contract" that's made to be broken- in the favor of the Big Boys.


----------



## BrettR (Apr 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Tim _
> *but this does seem like a "contract" that's made to be broken- in the favor of the Big Boys. *


You're assuming negative aspects--that contracts will be broken, customers or other parties will be screwed.

If merger is approved (one assumption), one would have to have faith with the controlling company and the FTC and DOJ for the reasons they approved the merger. As for equipment swaps, maybe I was wrong assuming we'd get equivalent equipment. A $500 paid unit that gets HDTV might be swapped with a simple 301 like unit that the homeowner would have to rent to maintain service.

Yeah, one could believe Echostar was purposely sending those bugs in their software upgrades to Dishplayer owners to have them migrate to another platform like an Echostar PVR (501, 721) .

I do not think Echostar would want to turn their backs on paying customers. Yeah, they might increase the rates for a few programming packages here and there but still be below cable, but I dont see Echostar deliberately wanting to screw their paying customers by giving inferior products as replacements, breaking DirecTV's contract with TiVo, and or charging new or increased PVR fees. The cost of providing guide data and support for an integrated PVR unit is much less than a standalone PVR unit. No doubt. DirecTV with TiVo fee went down from $9.99 to $4.99 and no features of the TiVo service were removed. DirecTV and Echostar still compete with cable. A huge advantage is the integrated PVR. It would make more sense for the DBS provider to get more of its subscriber base on PVR units (which help reduce churn). And to do this, they'd have to reduce PVR fees not increase them. Echostar might increase programming rates where they can. For example, Comcast sells HBO for $17 for 3 analog channels. DirecTV sells HBO for $12 (though Select Choice is required). DirecTV includes HBO Family West and Sundance that Dish does not include. Dish charges $13.99 and with a Dish 500 you get HBO Comedy that DirecTV doesnt carry. The new company may rates to $15 but all HBOs might be included. The increased rates could be a factor of HBO charging more to satellite provider, and/or the DBS provider wanting to keep a larger margin to themselves.


----------

