# Official Merger Rejection Thread



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

Folks this is the topic to post your thoughts and news links about the announcement of the FCC Denying the merger between Echostar and DirecTV.

http://money.cnn.com/2002/10/10/news/deals/fcc_echo_hughes/index.htm


----------



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/new...dateid=37539.5072222222-801033397&siteid=mktw


----------



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

Now even though the FCC has denied it, if the DOJ approves the merger then Echostar and DirecTV can ask to have their application re-opened.

So don't consider the merger dead yet, it's just in critical condition.


----------



## RichW (Mar 29, 2002)

The merger, as proposed, will be blocked, but other sources say that revised palns are being submitted which would foster another DBS competitor.

It could be that Charlie is down, but not out.


----------



## Guest (Oct 10, 2002)

The merger is effectively dead- it won't happen. News Corp will probably end up with Hughes.


----------



## Charles Oliva (Apr 22, 2002)

> So don't consider the merger dead yet, it's just in critical condition.


More like the Doc has turned off life support, and the Priest has been called.


----------



## bogi (Apr 3, 2002)

Its a good job on behalf of Powell. I might have been wrong about him.


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

Earlier stories indicated that they might review changes. Was this mentioned at all?


----------



## Mike123abc (Jul 19, 2002)

WSJ reports that comissioners said that proposed revisions were "too little, too late". It now goes to a judge. Even with all this, I bet it still takes a couple months before E* gives up.


----------



## LadyTalia (Oct 4, 2002)

[No message]


----------



## blingbling (Sep 6, 2002)

CNBC reported that the FCC has not blocked a merger since 1969 and rarely do they announce before DOJ. Apparently this merger was DOA months ago.


----------



## Mike123abc (Jul 19, 2002)

The FCC really needs to upgrade their servers, I still cannot pull the official docs out about the merger rejection... The server has probably melted with all the DBStalk people rushing over there to read what they said.


----------



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

I am at work and have my XM Satellite radio here, I have been flipping between CNN/FN Bloomberg, CNBC, CNET and BBC World, I have been hearing a lot of interesting comments about this.

Apparently one of the reporters talked to people at the FCC when the merger was announced and he said then everyone at the FCC already considered the merger dead.

I believe it was BBC who said that Echostar is already looking to file lawsuits over this.

It should be interesting.

I wonder if Mondays Charlie Chat will be postponed.


----------



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

From Broadcasting and Cable

The Federal Communications Commission voted 4-0 to deny EchoStar Communications Corp.'s planned takeover of Hughes Electronics Corp. and its DirecTV Inc. DBS division.

Read more at http://email.broadcastingcable.com/cgi-bin2/flo?y=eJL50FajUG0DdH0BrNy0AI


----------



## Guest (Oct 10, 2002)

Coming soon: The Echostar/Expressvu Joint Operating Agreement

See - some thought Charlie had no backup plan - now he'll pull the NIMIQ deal out of his pocket. "Charlie to lease 16 NIMIQ 1 transponders from Telesat @ 82degrees"


----------



## Curtis0620 (Apr 22, 2002)

82 cannot be used for US DBS. So big deal.


----------



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

Actually I just heard from someone who claims to work for Echostar.

Looks like Charlie has another card up his sleave that he has not played yet. From what I know Charlies plan may have the folks at Cablevision smiling from ear to ear.

From what I am hearing this is long before being dead.


----------



## Curtis0620 (Apr 22, 2002)

Looks like he held that card a little too long. The deal is dead.

Sorry Charlie.


----------



## Martyva (Apr 23, 2002)

Depending on your political view we, as a country are a Republic (sometimes called a representitive Democracy). The will of the people is to be enforced by those we elect as long as it does not infringe on the rights of the few. In this case urban areas lost nothing rural areas lost everything--locals, HDTV and high speed internet. A sad day


----------



## Gemini365i (Sep 7, 2002)

YESSSSSSSSS!


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

Might be time to move on. The customer still has a choice.


----------



## Guest (Oct 10, 2002)

It is simplistic thinking to believe that it is a done deal.


----------



## Brian Rector (Mar 25, 2002)

The problem now is that the consumer will only have a choice for so long. I look for only 1 DBS provider to exist around 3 years from now.


----------



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

Interesting reading from Bloomberg (Hope the link works)

Amung the interesting comments is this one

``There are ways to appeal the process,'' said John Stone, an independent satellite analyst who doesn't own shares in the companies. ``I expect the companies will try to revive the deal until someone finally says, `No means no.' ''

Read the rest at Bloomberg.
http://quote.bloomberg.com/fgcgi.cg...l&middle=ad_frame2_topfin&s=APaWvxRQ9RkNDIFJl


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

So they continue to show no direction... Ecostar needs to get off of this thing and try and salvage their business before they lose market share to an invigorated DirecTV (owned by GM or some other company). DirecTV has worked hard in the last year to improve their service while Ecostar has spent time and money on this merger which all knew would be a long shot. They should cut thier losses and focus on the consumer before they are the one being bought.


----------



## Sam1980 (Jul 19, 2002)

Looks like the FCC is yet another poltical arm of Gov; caving in to lobbyists and special interest. I doubt any of its members have but a clue of what it is to live in rural America. :nono:


----------



## MrAkai (Aug 10, 2002)

I don't care if you were for or against the merger, but doesn't the FCC/DOJ/etc/etc's actions seem a little unbalanced?

These are the governmental organizaitons that are letting the country devolve back into one phonecompany for local + LD, allowing Cable Mergers resulting in larger customer bases that the new E* would've had.

Consistancy would be nice, either rule on all the mergers with the same guidelines or remove themselves from the process.

I guess the cable companies and telcos just pay more for their rulings than E* did.


----------



## Guest (Oct 10, 2002)

MrAkai, well said! The FCC approves Comcast's buy-out of AT&T allowing their monopoly bases to expand and that's okay- they allow the merger of the 2 largest fuel retailers and that's okay- 

Consistancy Consistancy Consistancy Consistancy Consistancy Consistancy Consistancy Consistancy Consistancy Consistancy Consistancy Consistancy Consistancy Consistancy Consistancy 

The FCC is saying SHOW ME THE MONEY! - What no money for us? Then forget about it!


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

Well, the cable companies must be loving this.

With this ruling, they have as much time as they want to roll out new services without worrying about a merged company.

In the end, cable has far more bandwidth available for things like HDTV and internet services.

So, once again, the screaming was about the rural areas. Which was worse? To forever be shut out of HDTV in any great quantity and internt services (though with lots of lag time) or to have a choice between what will eventually be considered 2 mediocre providers.

All cable has to do is pick up a few more HDTV channels than D* or E* can ever carry, get TiVo built into some set-top boxes for high-end customers and they've suddenly become satellite killers (although one wonders if their legendary horrible service will ever improve).

I don't buy the 'lack of competition' argument since it's the rural guys who benefit from the NATIONWIDE competition when it comes to monthly rates. From Day One, nationwide pricing was a guarantee (an easy one since pricing by zip code could become an acounting nightmare - blackout tracking is bad enough!).

Make no mistake - cable loves this decision.


----------



## RichW (Mar 29, 2002)

"Ecostar needs to get off of this thing and try and salvage their business before they lose market share to an invigorated DirecTV (owned by GM or some other company). DirecTV has worked hard in the last year to improve their service while Ecostar has spent time and money on this merger which all knew would be a long shot. "

James, you have it wrong. Throughout the period Echostar has consistently increased its market share, not lost it. In fact, DirecTV announced last quarter that it was willing to concede more market share to Echostar and instead concentrate on high margin customers only.

The longer Charlie can prevent stodgy GM from doing anything else, the better his position becomes. I am sure he wants the merger, but if he doesn't get his way, keeping the merger plan in limbo is his next best strategy.


----------



## xxxx (May 25, 2002)

"cable loves this decision"

.. & so does Bill Gates. Now he can buy the missing piece to make:
MICROSOFT.WORLD

One super computer runnings Windows.XP.Home


----------



## Mike123abc (Jul 19, 2002)

Well finally the server load has dropped. I went and read the official statement and the 4 commissioner letters as posted at www.fcc.gov .

Two of the commissioners pretty much said they would never trust E* with a merger just because of what E* did with the must carry rules. In fact they are still mad and don't think E* is properly doing must carry.

After reading those 4 opinions I am very convinced that nothing E* can do short of handing half the market to cablevision (i.e. buy D* and then give it to cablevison) will ever change their minds.


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Joel B _
> *MrAkai, well said! The FCC approves Comcast's buy-out of AT&T allowing their monopoly bases to expand and that's okay- *


Its ok because there is a choice in their markets. DBS or Cable. In rural america, there would only be one choice. That is why it failed.


----------



## Mark Lamutt (Mar 24, 2002)

Well, 4 to 5 years from now, there will be no choice, then. The ONLY way dbs satellite television will survive is if the customers start paying a good deal more for it. There just isn't enough space to put the forthcoming HD channels that will be required once the analog side is shut down. So, either the customer ponies up the $$$ to put a large number of new satellites in orbit, or dbs becomes a niche market catering only to the people that refuse to jump into HD. Sure, there will be a great number of people who will want to watch downconverted HD to SD television, but over time they will leave in droves, and dbs will fail. Cable and OTA will be the only choice, and as only one cable company can service a particular area, customers will be in excatly the situation that the FCC is trying to avoid. This is a shortsighted, ignorant decision on the government's part. IMO of course...


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

Echostar will continue to try to manuever. Hughes will support tehse moves because one of the few things that gets Charlie off the hook for Pan Am Sat etc. is their failure to pursue the merger.


But on 1/21/03 it dies unless Charlie really does come up with something that will convince FCC and DoJ.


----------



## Guest (Oct 10, 2002)

If I want Direct TV I need to look up in my phone book and find a sub-contractor to come to my house with no accountability to the company and who's only concern seems to be upselling me equipment to pad his pockets and make that boat payment while Dish Network has established offices nationwide with company employees that come out to my house to install my system. Hey, Dish ain't perfect, and neither is the cable company, but to incinuate Dish has not invested money into offering better service is wrong. Direct TV has no employees other than marketers, sales people and admin. Dish has that and engineers, beta testers, trainers, installers and field staff. My point is Dish is trying to be something bigger than DirectTv and solid company that can truely compete in competitive market.


----------



## Chris Freeland (Mar 24, 2002)

As RichW said E* has gained market share on D*this past year. E* has also gained shelf space at RS and Wall Mart where D* once was exclusive. Now E* has added NHL-CI and is rumored to be getting NBA-SP and are in negotiations to share NFL-ST, it looks like another D* exclusive by the way side. With E* in more markets and a good possibility that E* will eventually have most or all the Sports paks that were once exclusive to D* combined with having the Supers and more International programing, E* will still be quite competitive. I am only disappointed that it appears that the merger is on its death bead, I and many others in medium and small markets will likely never have their locals on satellite. 

I just hope this latest long shot attempt to save the merger by selling 61.5 and 148 to Cablevision to provide competition will work. If this plan is successful, I and many others could enjoy are locals, increased HDTV, increased channels and services and still have a choice of three multi-channel service providers.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

I'm glad to see this, but by no means do I think it's over. Charlie will be tring to pull something, but I don't think it will work.


----------



## Charles Oliva (Apr 22, 2002)

As far as the E/D merger, I've been indifferent to it. If it happened, so be it, if not, then so be it also.

A couple of things from the FCC statement I did find curious though.

A. The FCC seems to be contridictory as far as rural America and LIL is concerned. Noting that a combined E/D will reduce to one Multi-Channel Provider in many rural areas, yet noting that as separate companies with their current satellites that DBS can serve the Top 100 markets(reaching 85 percent of US Households), as though saying that the additional 15 percent of the US to recieve LIL from a merged E/D does not provide enough "juice" to justify the combined entity. I guess the other 15 percent is not that important. Also of note is the two commissioners, one in particular, made a big case of Echostar's current LIL offerings, ie..secondary stations on wing sats, addtional dishes and informing the customer base of this. So I guess it okay that DBS can serve 4/5 of America with LIL programming, yet a DBS provider is acting in bad faith if it only offers 4/5 of LIL in a market on it's primary satellite.

B. The FCC's argument that competition in the Muti-Channel provider arena is what the FCC seeks rather than regulation seems also contridictory in that in many DMA's the number of cable providers have through FCC allowed mergers/transfers reduced to one, and in many cases have resulted in local/state/US gov'ts regulating cable rates. Also even with what the FCC says is 3 providers(One Cable, Two DBS), Cable rates continue overall to increase higher than the inflation rate. The truth is that while competition *can* keep prices in check, in many cases it's what the market is willing to bear not competition that dictates pricing. With a struggling capital market, that will force DBS providers to raise rates in the near future to fund future improvements in service, merger or no merger.


----------



## Karl Foster (Mar 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Joel B _
> *If I want Direct TV I need to look up in my phone book and find a sub-contractor to come to my house with no accountability to the company and who's only concern seems to be upselling me equipment to pad his pockets and make that boat payment while Dish Network has established offices nationwide with company employees that come out to my house to install my system. Hey, Dish ain't perfect, and neither is the cable company, but to incinuate Dish has not invested money into offering better service is wrong. Direct TV has no employees other than marketers, sales people and admin. Dish has that and engineers, beta testers, trainers, installers and field staff. My point is Dish is trying to be something bigger than DirectTv and solid company that can truely compete in competitive market. *


Is this for real? Are you honestly telling us that Circuit City, Best Buy, et. all are not reputable dealers? I bought my Directv system at a local company called RC Willey, the largest furniture and electronics company in the Intermoutain West. They are extremely reputable, did a good installation and were a pleasure to deal with.

Dish Network has dealers that canvass my neighborhood weekly selling Dish systems door-to-door and spread bold-faced lies about the merger and that us Directv subs should hurry and switch so we don't have to pay for new equipment later. I was actually told by one of these idiots that my Ultimatetv system would work fine with Dish Network.

Just because Directv subs out some of their work, doesn't make them a bad company. Sometimes subbing out some of the work produces a better product like DirecTivo, Ultimatetv, and standard receivers made by multiple companies.

My point is that this forum often turns into a Directv-bashing forum for some reason. Both companies do things good and both do things not so good. I personally would not have gained anything from the merger, so my views are much different than someone who would have gained something. I am glad that we still have choice. YMMV.


----------



## Lyle_JP (Apr 22, 2002)

> So they continue to show no direction... Ecostar needs to get off of this thing and try and salvage their business before they lose market share to an invigorated DirecTV (owned by GM or some other company). DirecTV has worked hard in the last year to improve their service while Ecostar has spent time and money on this merger which all knew would be a long shot. They should cut thier losses and focus on the consumer before they are the one being bought.


What are you talking about? In the last year Echstar has launched two spotbeam satellites, added several new local markets (particularly in smaller Pegasus-dominated markets where DirecTV is not interested), added their first major sports package, improved its hardware offerings, enormously increased their retail exposure (with Walmart and Radio Shack deals), expanded their High Defenition offerings, and has had *twice* the customer growth that DirecTV has experienced. Oh yeah, and they continue to be the _profitable_ DBS company.

-Lyle J.P.


----------



## nicepants (Apr 12, 2002)

I just can't wait to see monday's Charlie Chat. Every one I've seen so far has been charlie responding to questions with "When the merger happens....".

I wonder what he will say now?


----------



## Martyva (Apr 23, 2002)

Here's an analogy for rural America. the Electric company can sell electricity to rural customers, but only enough for the customers lights. What they could use for the stove, the toaster, the air conditioner is reserved for the urban areas, so the urban areas could have one more supplier.


----------



## Augie #70 (Apr 24, 2002)

Its just television - is this really that important of a topic to get all riled up about? If we all spent a fraction of the time spent discussing this merger on worthwhile endeavors society as a whole would be much better off.


----------



## bryan27 (Apr 1, 2002)

I just want to make one small interjection. This is a major set back for those for the merger, and a major move foward for those against it, but "The FCC provided Applicants 30 days to file an amended application to ameliorate the FCC's anti-competitive concerns and to file a petition to delay the hearing." (This was from the FCC's press release). We will have to see what the amendment says (which ought to be some good reading).


----------



## cnsf (Jun 6, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Augie #70 _
> *Its just television - is this really that important of a topic to get all riled up about? If we all spent a fraction of the time spent discussing this merger on worthwhile endeavors society as a whole would be much better off. *


If you really feel this way, find another forum. As I understand this domain name "DBSTalk.com", that will ALWAYS be the subject at hand. For some, it is how they make their living. For others, TV takes up a large portion of their lives, like it or not.

Try the Potpourri forum.


----------



## Guest (Oct 10, 2002)

Rupert Murdoch is probably jumping for joy but either he or his heirs may live to regret this day. GM can walk away after Jan. 21st but if it wants to see $3.3B it can do nothing after that date to threaten the survival of Echostar. If GM even thinks about anything that could threaten the financial survival of Echostar (such as a DirecTV-Newscorp merger) then its contract with Echostar will immediately become invalidated. The FCC has also been put on notice that a DirectTV-Newscorp merger would threaten competition and ultimately lead to a monopoly.


----------



## Gemini365i (Sep 7, 2002)

I just wish we all could use quotation marks when we write, so that I am not lost in what I am reading 

Thanks,
JE


----------



## dlsnyder (Apr 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Maddan _
> *Rupert Murdoch is probably jumping for joy but either he or his heirs may live to regret this day. GM can walk away after Jan. 21st but if it wants to see $3.3B it can do nothing after that date to threaten the survival of Echostar. If GM even thinks about anything that could threaten the financial survival of Echostar (such as a DirecTV-Newscorp merger) then its contract with Echostar will immediately become invalidated. The FCC has also been put on notice that a DirectTV-Newscorp merger would threaten competition and ultimately lead to a monopoly. *


If that is the case wouldn't that clause of the contract itself be anti-competetive? If the merger does fail and DirecTV is contractually barred from doing anything to "threaten the financial survival" of Echostar, well couldn't any business decision they make qualify as threatening? Starting a price war or an agressive marketing campaign could cause them to be in default.


----------



## spanishannouncetable (Apr 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Scott Greczkowski _
> *I believe it was BBC who said that Echostar is already looking to file lawsuits over this.
> 
> It should be interesting.
> ...


Charlie Ergan, looking to file lawsuits ? 

Jeez, he's never done THAT before :lol: :rotfl: :rolling:


----------



## andrzejpw (Apr 23, 2002)

lol, "when the merger happens. . ."

Monday's Charlie Chat will be the best thing EVER.


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

I will unfortunately be out of town on Monday...but I can tell you that most of the chat will consist of the same type of crying and whining about the FCC not having the people's interest at stake and they did when the SHVIA (Must Carry) was passed by congress.

See ya
Tony


----------



## Guest (Oct 11, 2002)

"The FCC approves Comcast's buy-out of AT&T allowing their monopoly bases to expand and that's okay- they allow the merger of the 2 largest fuel retailers and that's okay- "

That's what I'm talking about. Our government has been allowing telecoms, oil companies, banks, airlines, and media companies to merge at will for years. Now all the sudden they decide to get tough and reject the merger of E* and D*. A merger that I contend would have generated more competition because it would have allowed them to be able to compete more effectively with the huge cable conglomerates that, by the way, the FCC has allowed to be created.

Also, it hasn't been that long ago when there was basically no competition to cable. The only alternative was BUD which was not feasible for most because of the size of the dish and the investment required. Now the government wants to say that having 1 major competitor instead of 2 minor competitors would be a terrible thing. I don't remember the sky falling when their was no DBS at all!!


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

Comcast/AT&T merger is apples and oranges. They aren't eliminating competition, just making one company bigger. DBS will never be able to compete against cable in most markets IMO. Some cities already have huge fiber-optic lines that give cable such an advantage over DBS in bandwidth even with the extra satellites. What this merger means that if my in-laws don't like the service they have with Dish, they have no place to go. Now they can go to DirecTV. Don't think for a minute that Cablevision would be a competitor for a few years. They wouldn't be any competition.


----------



## LadyTalia (Oct 4, 2002)

[No message]


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

Of course thats the answer, and it should be. They just rejected their first offer. IF they can address the concerns, then they should be able to move forward. The only problem I see is the stern tone of the FCC's ruling. But they do have a blueprint to try and work with, so who knows. I'd just start making plans for the thing not to go though as well.


----------



## J Rath (Apr 14, 2002)

I agree with Mark, I can't see DBS surviving in 4-5 years. They are already losing some of their advantages they had over cable. Unless there are some technological advances that allow them to significantly decrease the amount of bandwidth needed I just don't see how they ae going to be able to keep up with cable rolling out products such as HDTV, VOD, etc.

Seems like the major argument is decreasing competition, especially in the rural markets. Is it the DBS providers fault that the cable companies have decided not to serve those areas for one reason or another? I think not. Does anyone know what the actual percentage of TV households the unserved markets are and what percentage of those households are actually DBS subs? Seems to me that number can't be all that high (although I would like to know what those actual numbers are), which would mean the FCC is basically saying the good of the few outweighs the good of the many.

James_F, while I agree that the Comcast/AT&T merger doesn't necessarily reduce competition, I don't see it fostering competition either. In fact I could see it stifling competition in the markets it serves. And remember, to a lesser informed public this merger does look the same on the surface; two pay TV providers merging into one behemoth provider. IMHO, approving Comcast/AT&T sends mixed signals.


----------



## Guest (Oct 11, 2002)

I don't care if there is a merger. All i want is goodlife, trio, AMC Monsters, B-Mania, MGM Movies, etc. etc.


----------



## Curtis0620 (Apr 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by LadyTalia _
> *Per official word at work (E*) they are appealing the decision and it's not final... something to the effect of "It ain't over yet" *


It's over. There is nothing that they could offer that will not reduce competition.

Sorry Charlie.


----------



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

If Charlie does indeed walk away from the Merger on January 21st then I am willing to predict that we might see "Dish Rainbow" sometime in the future.

It would not suprise me in the least to see Charlie help Cablevision start their Rainbow survice in the Dish Network umbrella.


----------



## Guest (Oct 11, 2002)

"Sorry Charlie"

This is just the end of the first inning for Charlie.

So he has to go to his bullpen a little early.

Now he will go ahead with his NDS lawsuit in order to thwart Rupert. He might just get enough damages to pay off all his debts. The suit calls for Rupoert to pay damages between $1.5B and $17B to Charlie/Kudelski for breaking & selling Nagravision secrets.

I want a piece of this action - there must be racial discrimination somewhere here - if only I could find Rupert's DNA on some of those websites.


----------



## razorbackfan (Aug 18, 2002)

The thing is, a lot of areas of the country are not served by cable, and those that are have only basic analog service. And broadband internet service is not available. I live in a fairly large city with a major University and don't have access to DSL or a cable modem and connect at 26k. Personally, I would love to see a merger so I can have the opportunity to get more channels and services from E*. I don't understand why it seems so many people are laughing because the merger failed.


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by J Rath _
> *James_F, while I agree that the Comcast/AT&T merger doesn't necessarily reduce competition, I don't see it fostering competition either. In fact I could see it stifling competition in the markets it serves. And remember, to a lesser informed public this merger does look the same on the surface; two pay TV providers merging into one behemoth provider. IMHO, approving Comcast/AT&T sends mixed signals. *


Good points, but from the FCC's standpoint, the two mergers are apples and oranges.


----------



## AllieVi (Apr 10, 2002)

> _Originally posted by LadyTalia _
> *Per official word at work (E*) they are appealing the decision and it's not final... something to the effect of "It ain't over yet" *


From what others have said, E* will have to pay D* $600 million if the merger fails, but each has a requirement to aggressively pursue it. Since the FCC has given them the 30-day window, it would seem that they have to keep trying even though they both know they're beating a dead horse. D* certainly doesn't want to do anything that would jeopardize the $600 million payment and Charlie doesn't seem willing to accept defeat.


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by razorbackfan_
> *
> The thing is, a lot of areas of the country are not served by cable, and those that are have only basic analog service. And broadband internet service is not available. I live in a fairly large city with a major University and don't have access to DSL or a cable modem and connect at 26k. Personally, I would love to see a merger so I can have the opportunity to get more channels and services from E*. I don't understand why it seems so many people are laughing because the merger failed.
> *


But at what cost. Directway is way to expensive for most consumers. Even if it drops in cost 50% its still 3-4 times expensive as AOL or MSN. Without DirecTV there would be no competition for this service.

I'm not laughing that the merger failed, I just don't see why its needed. IF DBS can't survive without the merger, there are other fundamental problems with the business model that must be addressed before mergers are the solutions IMO.


----------



## John Hodgson (Mar 28, 2002)

To Joel B:



> beta testers


You've got to be kidding right?


----------



## Mark Lamutt (Mar 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by timmy _
> *I don't care if there is a merger. All i want is goodlife, trio, AMC Monsters, B-Mania, MGM Movies, etc. etc. *


Don't count on any channel additions anytime in the near future, Timmy...there may be locals added, but I bet there won't be any national channels for a while.


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

What channels do you need? Everything is already there... Look at what is being added now, Goodlife, The Outdoor Channel... I can't see anything other than HDTV being hurt, but I don't believe IMHO that even with the merger, they can support HDTV locals.


----------



## Mike123abc (Jul 19, 2002)

Hmm a merger between rainbow and dish? I have been thinking for a while that Dish would now buy Rainbow's satellite for 61.5. If anything they could use it to do HDTV LIL for the 4 major nets. It is a pretty agressive spot beam satellite. I wonder if E3 can operate in double strength mode if half the transponders are handled by Rainbow-1?


----------



## Guest (Oct 11, 2002)

This is the beginning of the end for Charlie.

After John Malone & Rupert Murdoch get control of Directv, they will spend big marketing bucks to get DTV rolling again.

I fully expect Charlie to move his satellites to Asia to startup DishKorea; AfghaniDish; Son of SaddamDish; and PalestiniDish.


----------



## gowilk (Jul 3, 2002)

i must admit that i'm a little surprised at this point at the FCC action but EVERYONE should step back at the calendar ... this is the october BEFORE an election and many things "appear" to happen in October that disappear shortly after the election returns are counted.
I think the e*/D* merger is anti-competitive and anti-consumer but I think that's true with HP/Compaq, at&t/comcast and any number of other mergers that have been allowed to occur in the last several years.
Nevertheless my analytical mind tells me to ignore and discount anything said or done in the next month as "nothing but a political ploy" and watch the action starting November 15.
I think the following events will occur:
1. DOJ will REJECT the merger as well.
2. Charlie will bay at the moon about how politicians are not being fair to them and that consumers will be hurt.
3. Charlie and d* will sit down in a back room with higher ups at 
DOJ and FCC and negotiate a compromise agreement that somehow will come together and appear as a win for the regulators.
(NOTE: read the fine print in the revision and Charlie will have given up very little to consumers but he may wind up giving back satellite slots to the government for resale (ie the government benefits at the ultimate expense of consumers YET again))

The only fly in the ointment is if D* has already CUT a new deal with murdoch or someone or if their lawyers convince Hughes that Charlie will have to pay them big bucks in January if the merger fails. if D* works against the merger in background, then all bets are off. 

it ain't all business, just politics as usual.


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

Its not politics. Its a bad deal for the consumer. The FCC saw that and DID NOT let politics in to approve a merger that would cost consumers a choice.


----------



## Rifleman (Oct 4, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Mark Lamutt _
> *Well, 4 to 5 years from now, there will be no choice, then. The ONLY way dbs satellite television will survive is if the customers start paying a good deal more for it. There just isn't enough space to put the forthcoming HD channels that will be required once the analog side is shut down. So, either the customer ponies up the $$$ to put a large number of new satellites in orbit, or dbs becomes a niche market catering only to the people that refuse to jump into HD. Sure, there will be a great number of people who will want to watch downconverted HD to SD television, but over time they will leave in droves, and dbs will fail. Cable and OTA will be the only choice, and as only one cable company can service a particular area, customers will be in excatly the situation that the FCC is trying to avoid. This is a shortsighted, ignorant decision on the government's part. IMO of course... *


I can only speak for myself, BUT! At just under $40/mo. (for my E* bill) I'm at my limit. It's not that the money isn't there, but I just refuse to pay any more. It's that simple!

Even though part of my job is making DTV happens, and YES, I've seen HDTV, HDTV is a non-starter for me.. TV is just bubble gum for the brain and simply doesn't warrant any greater expenditure. The programming drives this: I just haven't seen a program that stirs me enough to make me want to part with any more money.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Laverne & Shirley in HD is STILL Laverne & Shirley!


----------



## Guest (Oct 11, 2002)

Perhaps now is the time for the real work to begin. E* & D* should work out a single advanced standard for DBS in the future and start a joint venture to provide local-in-local for 150 markets.


----------



## Mike123abc (Jul 19, 2002)

It is not in their interest to work together to provide LIL. LIL is viewed as a way to get people to subscribe to thier service. If they can provide a city that the other one cannot, it is a big advantage. There is a reason E* picks up a lot of mid sized DMAs. These DMAs have tons of rural people without access to cable. If you are in a top 80 DMA you will probably get both D* and E* competing for your business.

The smaller DMAs will be picked off by one or the other. I would not be surprised if in the long run the top 150+ are done... 80 by both and 30-40 markets picked off by each. Beyond the top 80 it is not really worth it to go into a market if the other one is already there, it is better to pick a different market that you can get an exclusive on. By denying the merger, the FCC essentially will give a monopoly on LIL to all the smaller markets anyways. Yes there will still be competition for the national channels, but the LIL will be a monopoly if you are lucky to get them at all.

These guys are not blind competetors. There will be a race to pick up markets once the merger is finally denied. If you are E* or D* and see the other one has picked up market 111, you know that if you also put in market 111 you will lose money (and so will your competetor). So, you will go for market 112, that way you can make a profit (and the other guy happens to make one too). You also know that your customers will never forgive you if you drop a market that is unprofitable, you may as well never offer it and hope they pick you for another reason like NFL Sunday ticket or Super Stations.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

Why would Rupert be allowed to buy D* when he wasn't allowed to buy the assets that ended up being what E* now has at 110? (I want to say that was originally the Primestar attempt at getting into high-power DBS - Primestar being a cable company consortium)


----------



## Guest (Oct 12, 2002)

I don't see a "DISH Rainbow" in the future (and hope Charlie isn't even thinking in that direction).

As a former Cablevision customer I can say that it was Cablevision's practices that drove me to DBS in the first place. Don't think for a minute that the WE (Romance Classics)/IFC shared channel on E* was E*'s idea. For years, Cablevision had several shared channels on thier system (usually merging the religious networks into one channel). Usually programming I was interested in on one network was on during the hours that a different network was being shown on the one shared channel. That nonsense finally came to an end when Cablevision sold thier Cleveland area systems to Adelphia. 

Also any "deals" concerning 61.5 has to consider the impact on Sky Angel's 8 licences (several posts or newslinks forget that SA owns the licences for some of the frequencies at 61.5 that E* is currently using for thier services).


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

If Charlie IS thinking of DishRainbow in the future then you guys (E* Subs)WILL NEVER get YES if that happened..


----------



## Guest (Oct 16, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Mike123abc _
> *The FCC really needs to upgrade their servers, I still cannot pull the official docs out about the merger rejection... The server has probably melted with all the DBStalk people rushing over there to read what they said. *


Any server is dead when a whole bunch of enthusiasts pound it nonstop. The same happens with Linux mirror sites every time a new release of RedHat is released.


----------



## Guest (Oct 16, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Maddan _
> *Perhaps now is the time for the real work to begin. E* & D* should work out a single advanced standard for DBS in the future and start a joint venture to provide local-in-local for 150 markets. *


Local in Local is going to bump into HDTV and one of them is going to have a crash landing.


----------



## Guest (Oct 16, 2002)

> _Originally posted by andrzejpw _
> *lol, "when the merger happens. . ."
> 
> Monday's Charlie Chat will be the best thing EVER.  *


Damn, the one time I wish I had DISH!!

I wonder if someone can tape it for me?


----------

