# Downside of Murdoch with directv



## Guest (Apr 17, 2003)

http://storage.ziffdavis.com/article2/0,3973,1022159,00.asp

Does this bother anyone else?

"More importantly for News Corp., the company will be able to sell advertising that's immune from fast-forwarding with a PVR."

"This is all on top of the service fees that customers will pay for the opportunity to interact with content. "

"Finally, with DirecTV, Murdoch now controls a complete digital content platform, spanning hardware, operating system, delivery and software. Some of his hot content properties may only be available from this platform, coming over his service and viewable on his hardware"


----------



## spanishannouncetable (Apr 23, 2002)

Nope.


----------



## platinum (Oct 28, 2002)

Me either


----------



## raj2001 (Nov 2, 2002)

*yawn* I view this as just more FUD.


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

If he prevents commercials from being skipped then that will defeat the purpose of the Tivo and other PVR devices for his service and there will be many angry customers. This would be good for Dish.


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

Not bothered here either


----------



## waydwolf (Feb 2, 2003)

The DBS installer side of me says that is bad for DTV sales given Murdoch's history, and good for Dish sales and cable sales.

If nothing else, it will put Rupert Murdoch in the same box with Bill Gates in the eyes of the homebrew PVR crowd who hate being told what they can and cannot record and what they must record. None of them are going to sit there and be happy with PVR that MAKES them record commercials.


----------



## platinum (Oct 28, 2002)

Nowhere in that article did it say he will implement any of those features. It says it could be done. Jumping to conclusions again


----------



## Ric (Apr 26, 2002)

Also you need to read the context that these quotes are stated. It didn't mean that Murdoch can stop you from fast forwarding through commercials as you do now. The quotes referred to being unable to skip commercials for future interactive features or having an ad delivered as part of the feature. No different than the internet in my view.


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

Didnt they do that with one of the PVR receivers already on Direct, removing the commercial skip feature?


----------



## invaliduser88 (Apr 23, 2002)

Don't you get it!

Murdoch can do no wrong!

We don't need HDTV. We want to watch commercials commerials commerials! Sports shouldn't be free it should all be PPV! 

We will blindly accept Murdoch's word as the only truth.

Murdoch is our savior! Murdoch is god!

:barf:


----------



## platinum (Oct 28, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Jacob S _
> *Didnt they do that with one of the PVR receivers already on Direct, removing the commercial skip feature? *


Nope


----------



## platinum (Oct 28, 2002)

> _Originally posted by invaliduser88 _
> *Don't you get it!
> 
> Murdoch can do no wrong!
> ...


Dude...get a grip....:eek2:


----------



## invaliduser88 (Apr 23, 2002)

It's called sarcasm...


----------



## Cyclone (Jul 1, 2002)

Hard to tell on the internet. 

I bet that Direct TV will be a better product in a few years because of this buyout. In Hindsight we will be glad that the merger was blocked. Cause we need to have at least two sat providers out there. I would actually preffer a few more.

Cyclone


----------



## EvanS (Mar 27, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Jacob S _
> *Didnt they do that with one of the PVR receivers already on Direct, removing the commercial skip feature? *


IIRC, it was more like they forced a short download to record which could not be deleted until after a few days. Seems like it was an ad for an upcoming event but I just can't remember...


----------



## Chris Freeland (Mar 24, 2002)

These Murdock pom pom waivers are worse then the Charlie pom pom waivers ever thought of being  .


----------



## Rick P (Jun 30, 2002)

Chris.. you beat me to it


----------



## DarrellP (Apr 24, 2002)

Glad I'm a Dish sub.


----------



## Guest (Apr 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by DarrellP _
> *Glad I'm a Dish sub. *


Me too! I want no part of Murdoch's service. Not only does he provide low quality(his dinky excuse for HDTV only one of the many reasons), I don't care for his ultra conservitive views either. I am sure it will influence programming decisions in the future with Directv(racier content/channels may not be carried).


----------



## Guest (Apr 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by DCSholtis _
> *Not bothered here either *


LOL, if Dish was the one talking about disabling PVR functions, you would be up in arms about "Cheap Charlie taking away more features!!". Hypocrisy at it's finest on these boards I tell ya!


----------



## Guest (Apr 19, 2003)

Me too! I want no part of Murdoch's service. Not only does he provide low quality(his dinky excuse for HDTV only one of the many reasons), I don't care for his ultra conservitive views either. I am sure it will influence programming decisions in the future with Directv(racier content/channels may not be carried).


GUESS YOU NEVER READ THE SUN OR HAVE SEEN PAGE 6


----------



## Sherlock (Mar 24, 2002)

I always thought the hotties were on page 3...


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

What about the piracy issues? Is Murdoch cheap when it comes to fighting piracy and would he use the encryption he uses on his systems overseas? Since DirecTv came out with his own card or about to come out with its own card, then this would be a lot of switching in cards.

Also would the price of the hardware go up or does he offer cheap prices on hardware overseas and subsidize it over there too?


----------



## raj2001 (Nov 2, 2002)

> _Originally posted by invaliduser88 _
> *Don't you get it!
> 
> Murdoch can do no wrong!
> ...


LOL. Take out Murdoch and insert Charlie in there. That's how you DISH loyalists come across.

I'm totally tired of hearing things like: "Murdoch is taking over D*, D* is going down, this is good for Charlie and DISH, Charlie couldn't have the merger so D* will die blah blah blah".

Can't we just have a discussion about Satellite technology and issues without it appearing as though each DBS provider is some sort of fundamentalist religion?? Give it up!!! It's just TV for crying out loud!!


----------



## Karl Foster (Mar 23, 2002)

I'll just say again - it is good to have the whole situation resolved for the sake of the stockholders - the ones with truly something to win or lose in the deal. We'll just have to see what News Corp. does. Perhaps they will keep the status quo, perhaps not. Nobody here knows for sure, so any speculation is a bit premature.


----------



## Cyclone (Jul 1, 2002)

> Can't we just have a discussion about Satellite technology and issues without it appearing as though each DBS provider is some sort of fundamentalist religion?? Give it up!!! It's just TV for crying out loud!!


I guess we would just have to ask, which DBS would Jesus subscribe too?

That aside. I would just compare how DirectTV operates to the way his other DBS services in Europe and Asia operate and you'll figure out what to expect.

Anyone have web links to those services?


----------



## mnassour (Apr 23, 2002)

http://www.newscorp.com/operations/television.html

This will link you to all of News Corporation's TV services.


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

Jesus would have better things to do than to watch tv.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

It's easy to recite the list of channels that Fox has a stake in, including a number of sports channels.

What channels does Charlie have a hand in? Beyond the Dish Barker channels... none. 

Yet, the delay has given Murdoch a better bargain. Go figure.


----------



## Cheyenne (Apr 23, 2002)

I do not foresee a problem with this acquisition.
The fed's will most likely require independent identities of content sources and content delivery. aka, Sony. Costs of content to all providers will be equal.


----------



## Guest (Apr 20, 2003)

I thought there was bad news for both Dish and Directv subscribers. I thought that modification of the DVR to make it more difficult to skip commercials would be bad for Directv users.

On the other hand, being owner of content and delivery method could enable Murdoch to push Dish out of some markets.


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

Yes but Dish should have equal rights to the programming.


----------



## BobMurdoch (Apr 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by raj2001 _
> *
> 
> LOL. Take out Murdoch and insert Charlie in there. That's how you DISH loyalists come across.
> ...


Amen and Hallelujah!

To ALL non-trolls.....

I hereby agree to stop slamming Rupert ( I have been one of his critics) IF you D* cheerleaders will do the same. Focus on the programming and equipment and STOP slamming people for being stupid/clueless/etc. for choosing one provider over another. Let's get back to attacking the business decisions and avoid slamming the business people. We are now going to have TWO egocentric satellite providers with the same bad habits of having a stubborn CEO jam HIS preferred way of doing business down our throats. Charlie will be cheap, and Rupert will dumb down HDTV with 480p. Yeah, yeah. We know... let's move on.

Hey, I'd love to get D* and get Sunday Ticket and YES. I also love my waivers for my west coast channels and my superstations and look forward to DiscoveryHD.

We are going back to an era with two strong competitors going after each other for cable subscribers as well as other Satellite subscribers looking to switch. Two things should happen, Charlie has to become less stingy or D* will gallop past him with programming E* doesn't offer. D* has to become more stingy with programmers if they EVER hope to turn a profit again. In the end, ahealthy satellite industry is important to all of us. Otherwise, we wind up returning, tail between our legs, to cable.


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

Well I think there will be some bad things to happen as a result of this, just as there would be with any ownership change, but there will also be some benefits as well. Not everything will come out good, its just if the benefits will outweigh the negatives.


----------

