# Will Dish Network and Directv Merge ?



## buzzcut

Sirius and XM satellite radio, could this clear the way for a merger of Dish and the "main comp"? 

if my memory serves me correct, i believe this was tried before? also, believe it was killed for "competition" reasons. seems to be more and more competition out there now.

was just curious if anyone had any thoughts on the subject?

just your "average joe" Dish subscriber (just celebrated 2yrs July 6th), so, don't follow this stuff too closely.

have a good one everybody!


----------



## DBS Commando

Will never happen. Would completely monopolize the markets in which TV subscribers only have 2 providers to choose from; Dish or Direct.


----------



## space86

With the approval of the XM and Sirius merger, could the merger of Dish Network and Directv be next ?


----------



## harsh

space86 said:


> With the approval of the XM and Sirius merger, could the merger of Dish Network and Directv be next ?


While the DARS approval seems to suggest that the tide has turned, I don't think DISH is going to spend the money to try and buy DIRECTV again after what happened last time.


----------



## scooper

No way no how. I don't think even Charlie thought it was going to go through the first time, but it was worth it to look at the competition's books.


----------



## kstuart

Note that the XM-Sirius merger vote was 3 Republicans For, 2 Democrats Against.

A betting man would bet that in the future, the FCC will be a majority of Democrats.

I doubt that we will see any big mergers of any sort of companies in the next few years, even where the FCC is not involved...


----------



## jclewter79

As much as I prefer E* over D*, I would hate to see a merger. In the area I live in they are the only 2 choices. Then again, it could be a pretty great company, rock solid HDDVR's, almost unlimited bandwidth, but, prices would be sky high.


----------



## tcusta00

I think the long-term profitability/viability card was what XMSR/SIRI played to get their merger approved. I think it's unlikely, but possible that it will be tried with satellite TV. 

Not to turn this into a DirecTV/Dish pissing contest, but I seriously doubt that Dish will be the acquirer here, either... DirecTV more than doubles their market cap and assets and is more than 9 times as profitable. 

I also think that M&A activity among larger companies will increase, rather than decrease as suggested above. Companies look for synergies, especially in tough times like these, and therefore like to bargain hunt. Bank of America and Countrywide. JP Morgan and Bear Stearns. Your tax dollars and Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac. Okay, that last one was a joke, but you see what I'm getting at.


----------



## space86

I would not like E* and D* to merge.

Right now when you need new equipment you can switch between the two,
if they were to merge you would not have that option.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

tcusta00 said:


> Not to turn this into a DirecTV/Dish pissing contest, but I seriously doubt that Dish will be the acquirer here, either... DirecTV more than doubles their market cap and assets and is more than 9 times as profitable.


Unfortunately, that has little to do with how takeovers happen. K-Mart had already filed for bankruptcy when they bought out Sears. I hear semi-routinely about companies that are in bankruptcy somehow managing to buy-out companies that are not in financial troubles... so no reason a smaller company cannot buy a bigger one.

Besides, sometimes a smaller company has more cash in the bank than a bigger one... in which case they are more easily able to orchestrate a buyout.

Stranger things have happened.

That said, I don't believe we'll see this tried any time soon since it was sort-of tried a couple of years ago.


----------



## harsh

tcusta00 said:


> I also think that M&A activity among larger companies will increase, rather than decrease as suggested above.


And hopefully so will the anti-monopoly activity of the DOJ.

While I agree with your idea, I hope that reason prevails and some manner of competition remains. It isn't easy to get back what you've lost in a monopoly unless the monopoly self destructs like a certain company in Redmond, Washington seems to be doing lately.

Here's where I see a difference in the business models between DARS and TV: DARS competes typically with non-franchised terrestrial stations whereas DBS competes with carriers who are quite often granted franchises by regional governments.

I think the fact that CATV's hands are often tied by these franchises will be the reason that a DBS merger would not go as well as the politically decided DARS merger went and that means a no go.


----------



## Tom Robertson

Since both companies have shown that both can be profitable simultaneously, DOJ will not approve a merger.

The only thing that might have happened was shared services for locals, but that ship has likely sailed as well.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## tcusta00

HDMe said:


> Unfortunately, that has little to do with how takeovers happen. K-Mart had already filed for bankruptcy when they bought out Sears. I hear semi-routinely about companies that are in bankruptcy somehow managing to buy-out companies that are not in financial troubles... so no reason a smaller company cannot buy a bigger one.
> 
> Besides, sometimes a smaller company has more cash in the bank than a bigger one... in which case they are more easily able to orchestrate a buyout.
> 
> Stranger things have happened.
> 
> That said, I don't believe we'll see this tried any time soon since it was sort-of tried a couple of years ago.


KMart and Sears were two companies in a lot of trouble. As far as investment banking is concerned you're comparing apples and oranges. Yes, I'm aware that a smaller company can buy a larger one. However, in this case, it's not going to happen, even if there weren't other extenuating circumstances that make it nigh onto impossible.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Tom Robertson said:


> Since both companies have shown that both can be profitable simultaneously, DOJ will not approve a merger.
> 
> The only thing that might have happened was shared services for locals, but that ship has likely sailed as well.
> 
> Cheers,
> Tom


I agree on both counts.


----------



## jclewter79

It might be a good think if they combined their powers just to cover LIL's but, probably won't happen.


----------



## Jtaylor1

No way! If D* & E* merges, I'm buying a digital-to-analog box for my TV.

I would like to see D* go back to Music Choice.

I heard Liberty Media's founder on CNBC says that a merge seems unlikely. I think.


----------



## Stuart Sweet

A story by Reuters. covering the Wall Street Journal, claims:



> PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - U.S. satellite-TV provider Dish Network Corp (NasdaqGSISH - News) is weighing another attempt to merge with rival DirecTV Group Inc (NasdaqGSTV - News), The Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday.


Full story: http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/080805/dishnetwork.html?.v=1


----------



## 477193

HDMe said:


> Unfortunately, that has little to do with how takeovers happen. K-Mart had already filed for bankruptcy when they bought out Sears. I hear semi-routinely about companies that are in bankruptcy somehow managing to buy-out companies that are not in financial troubles... so no reason a smaller company cannot buy a bigger one.


Kmart & Sears were both under the control of the same private equity firm when that happened. It was more like a merge. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6509683/


----------



## Hansen

I think these are too big of players in the market for the DOJ to sanction a merger.

As a side note, a lack of competition or reduction in competition caused by a merger is not good. Although some competition would still exist from the cable companies and fiber companies, that competition could be driven out of the market by such a big merger, which is not good for us. Plus, we still want Dish as a satellite provider out there to keep pressure on DirecTV to continuously improve what it offers its customers.


----------



## tiger2005

No way do I see this happening. There are a lot of comparisons between Sirius and XM, but that's an entirely different industry IMO. Radio competition (with iPods, etc.) is huge. TV content providers are few and far between.


----------



## BudShark

While I think the reason against the first time was laughable (competition in rural areas - they had agreed to maintain 1 price nationwide as they do now... the rural areas would've benefitted from urban competition!) I still don't see it going through.

Sirius and XM were allowed for 1 reason - the entire industry likely would have failed within 5 years were it not for the merger. Both Dish and DirecTV are profitable, viable entities. They even used the argument that HD was going to sap their bandwidth and ability to compete in the future... and here we are now a few years later with a much FASTER rollout of HD LiL than anyone expected... they have no leg to stand on other than "It'll make us richer and may or may not help the customer..." No way, no how it flies. Republicans or Democrats...

Chris


----------



## gully_foyle

I'm going to be contrarian here. I think there is some chance for this, based in part upon DISH's weakness and in part on the absence of a Murdoch sabotaging things politically for personal gain.

DISH could well go out of business. If they lose the TiVo case (or rather if their loss of the TiVo case becomes final and is enforced) they will be essentially out of the DVR business, which means their customers leave in droves. Coupled with that is their current customer outflow (while DirecTV is still growing). Charlie Egan is not proposing this from a position of strength. He sees the future numbers and they look terrible.

I think that a merger, especially one that guaranteed 100% HD coverage for both sat and locals and added price restraints/rollbacks and unlocked the sports packages might fly with regulators, cable operators and rural broadcasters,

_The real opposition to a merger would likely come from DirecTV_. Why should they merge when there is a good chance DISH will fold and they can buy the orbital assets for really cheap, without the pesky costs associated with upgrading DISH subscribers?


----------



## Chinatown

Yes, but then all Dish customers would be saddled with single tuner, inferior receivers, and all that extra wiring.

No thanks.


----------



## EricRobins

kcmurphy88 said:


> DISH could well go out of business. If they lose the TiVo case (or rather if their loss of the TiVo case becomes final and is enforced) they will be essentially out of the DVR business, which means their customers leave in droves. Coupled with that is their current customer outflow (while DirecTV is still growing). Charlie Egan is not proposing this from a position of strength. He sees the future numbers and they look terrible.


This could be the whole reason for the merger. Since D* has a license under the TiVo patents, such a merger would make the case moot. There may be massive past damages, but the current E* customers would then be under D*'s license. (This all depends on the specific language of the license agreement, which I have not seen.)


----------



## nmetro

Chinatown said:


> Yes, but then all Dish customers would be saddled with single tuner, inferior receivers, and all that extra wiring.
> 
> No thanks.


Actually, with Echostar being the provider of the equipment (now a separate company), a merger would provide bother DirecTV and DISH subscribers the bets of both worlds. A merger would be similar to XM and Sirius. DISH Network subscribers would benefit from the DirectTV sports packages and DirectTV subscribers would gain movie packages and DVR equipment from Echostar. This may even reduce costs for both subscriber bases. Also, companies like Bresnan Communications continue to enter the rural market to provide an alternative to satellite; as are some of the major telephone companies. While 5 years ago when a merger was tried the FCC disallowed the merger, but today the environment has changed enough for making a merger possible.


----------



## jessshaun

Chinatown said:


> Yes, but then all Dish customers would be saddled with single tuner, inferior receivers, and all that extra wiring.
> 
> No thanks.


:lol: single tuner? how so? Dish's current DVR's can only output HD on one tuner. Making the second output useless. Inferior receivers? in my opinion, I have found Direct's DVRs to be MUCH better than dish's. ...and extra wiring... one word, SWM.


----------



## Chinatown

I have had both services.............Yes they are inferior receivers. Have had the 622 for 18 months. It has been spot on.

I guess I am not hip to what SWM means. Perhaps you can enlighten me.


----------



## jclewter79

I just don't see a merger happening and, I pray that it does not. They are the only two choices in my area. Both are profitable I don't see it happening.


----------



## xm21

If a merger did happen I wonder what they would call the combied companies ?


----------



## grooves12

jclewter79 said:


> As much as I prefer E* over D*, I would hate to see a merger. In the area I live in they are the only 2 choices. Then again, it could be a pretty great company, rock solid HDDVR's, almost unlimited bandwidth, but, prices would be sky high.


How would prices be SKyhigh?? 95%+ of DirecTV/Dish's customers are NOT in rural areas. They have to compete with Cable/Fios/... and more and more Internet Downloads and services. The only way prices would go UP with a merger would be if they were allowed to charge one price to rural customers and another to urban customers... and the FCC would never allow that to happen.

If anything you could argue prices would go down, because with technology consolidation, the combined compnanies bandwidth would increase exponentially and they wouldn't be forced to lauch as many new satellites in the future.


----------



## ATARI

DBS Commando said:


> Will never happen. Would completely monopolize the markets in which TV subscribers only have 2 providers to choose from; Dish or Direct.


Never say never.

kcmurphy88 makes some good arguements. (post #22)


----------



## bonscott87

Chinatown said:


> I guess I am not hip to what SWM means. Perhaps you can enlighten me.


SWM = Single Wire Multiswitch

With the SWM8 you can run 8 tuners with just one coax cable and use regular cable splitters to split the signal as you want. Basically can use the existing cable infrastructure in the home. And a DVR that has dual tuners just needs one cable in and it is dual tuners with one cable.


----------



## bonscott87

As for the merger, I just don't see why. Both have what, 40 million receivers in use? You'd have to swap that 40 million at the cost of billions to migrate one to the other or swap all 80 million to go to a new service. I just can't see why they would do this.

And frankly if they were to swap over to the Dish system or if Charlie were in any way involved with the new company I would switch to Uverse or Charter with no hesitation.


----------



## tahoerob

Why not a merger. People have many different ways to access TV. NONE ARE MANDATORY. 
1. OTA - free
2. Satellite - pay, 2 services; D* & E*
3. Cable - pay, usually a LOCAL *monopoly*
4. FiOS - pay, in select metro areas that actually competes w/ cable

The competition is really based on *mode of transmission.*

With radio as example. OTA radio is FREE. HD radio involves equipment investment, then FREE. Satellite radio is both pay service as well as equipment investment. The difference is MODE of transmission.

There is MORE competition with TV than radio. No reason to now not approve a Satellite TV merger.


----------



## sampatterson

Lack of competition in rural areas and the change of the political makeup of the commission (replacing republican with democrat) will probably keep any merger from happening


----------



## Alan Gordon

bonscott87 said:


> As for the merger, I just don't see why. Both have what, 40 million receivers in use? You'd have to swap that 40 million at the cost of billions to migrate one to the other or swap all 80 million to go to a new service. I just can't see why they would do this.


Start small.

Upgrade smaller local markets first. Dish offers local channels in my DMA (DMA #146), DirecTV does not. Swap them out to DirecTV receivers and DirecTV dishes... and DirecTV now offers SD locals in Albany, GA to both former Dish subscribers, and current DirecTV subscribers. Doing so also locks them into new contracts... which is money in the bank for DirecTV.

Whenever a Dish sub wants to upgrade to HD... BAM!! Upgrade them to DirecTV and lock them into a 2 year contract.

Then move onto other premimum channels like sports subscriptions, adult programming, etc...

Sure, there will be duplicated programming for a while, but you can get benefits simply by starting small, which will help pay for additional upgrades/swaps in the future.

~Alan


----------



## ThunderRoad

They look to merge, I wouldn't doubt one of the first discussions between them and the FCC would be about making ala carte available to consumers as a condition, similar to what they're doing with Sirius-XM. Anyone think a merged Dish-Directv would go along with something like that?


----------



## EricRobins

I think we have forgotten another competitor, INTERNET STREAMS.

Maybe we can require the new combined company (DirecDish ?) to spin off the Directway (is that still part of D*?) so that rural people can have (relatively) high speed internet access to those internet streams.

As in any market analysis, it all depends upon how small you want to define the market. You will always define the market to support your end-goal - Its all up to the FCC/DOJ regulators.


----------



## Albie

ThunderRoad said:


> They look to merge, I wouldn't doubt one of the first discussions between them and the FCC would be about making ala carte available to consumers as a condition, similar to what they're doing with Sirius-XM. Anyone think a merged Dish-Directv would go along with something like that?


I don't think Dish would have a real problem with a la carte. It is the programming providers that oppose ala carte. Now Liberty Media which controls Directv might oppose it as they are a content provider.


----------



## Wetboss

Competition? What's that? Around here you have 1 Cable company and no one calls that a monopoly. I even wrote my congressman and got blown off. If enough money goes to the write law maker anything is legal.


----------



## syphix

Swanni predicted it!...so it's _gotta_ come true!! 

God....I hope not.....


----------



## James Long

bonscott87 said:


> As for the merger, I just don't see why. Both have what, 40 million receivers in use? You'd have to swap that 40 million at the cost of billions to migrate one to the other or swap all 80 million to go to a new service. I just can't see why they would do this.


By the time that a merger would get approved both DISH and DirecTV would be a lot further along in their MPEG4 plans. Less receivers to replace and (thinking ahead) the companies could design "compatible with the other guys" software into the receivers.

Or they could figure out some way of using the same audio/video streams for both services and have separate authorization streams (unless there are conflicts or DirecTV is so far off of standard DVB that there can be no crossover).

I don't see a merger being attempted ... certainly not approved. The best attempt I can see is the companies working together (HA!) to share bandwidth on locals ... but that is a stretch. Perhaps forming a third "locals only" DBS company that would sell to DirecTV and DISH customers?

If they did merge it would be years before any huge benefit would be seen. The negatives would be near immediate - the ability to drop D* for E* and vice versa would be gone. Perhaps a few channels that one provider has the contract for and not the other would be added. Or perhaps the content providers would want all new contracts and channels would be lost. Since it isn't going to happen I'll stop worrying about it.


----------



## Bob Coxner

Been there, tried that.

Note the non-story said *DISH* was weighing a merger. It didn't say DTV was interested. If I were Dish, I too would be desperately looking for alternatives. There's no incentive for DTV to merge, unless Charlie just wants to hand over Dish assets for pennies on the dollar. Even then, it wouldn't fly with the Dems in control of the DOJ and a Dem majority on the FCC.


----------



## carlsbad_bolt_fan

HDMe said:


> Unfortunately, that has little to do with how takeovers happen. K-Mart had already filed for bankruptcy when they bought out Sears. I hear semi-routinely about companies that are in bankruptcy somehow managing to buy-out companies that are not in financial troubles... so no reason a smaller company cannot buy a bigger one.
> 
> Besides, sometimes a smaller company has more cash in the bank than a bigger one... in which case they are more easily able to orchestrate a buyout.
> 
> Stranger things have happened.
> 
> That said, I don't believe we'll see this tried any time soon since it was sort-of tried a couple of years ago.


It's all about financing the debt. My wife works for Invitrogen. They just bought ABI for nearly $7 billion. They used 3 banks to finance the deal one of which, Bank of America, immediately downgraded Invitrogen's stock.


----------



## gully_foyle

Chinatown said:


> Yes, but then all Dish customers would be saddled with single tuner, inferior receivers, and all that extra wiring.
> 
> No thanks.


Hmmm.. Here I have two DirecTV DVRs hooked up to one wire, split once behind the TV. All feeding 4 tuners. A second wire carries OTA, but that's my choice, not a necessity. So I'm not sure what you mean.

But lets not hijack this into a D vs E thread, please.


----------



## BobaBird

Hansen said:


> Plus, we still want Dish as a satellite provider out there to keep pressure on DirecTV to continuously improve what it offers its customers.


But if Dish was the only provider you wouldn't have to keep waiting for DirecTV to catch up!  (It's a joke... I know both keep leap-frogging)


James Long said:


> ... and (thinking ahead) the companies could design "compatible with the other guys" software into the receivers.


That was supposedly already being done during the last attempt. I don't know if that design is hardware or software, but if it has been continued in current receivers, a larger portion of the E* subscriber base might only need repoints.


----------



## gully_foyle

sampatterson said:


> Lack of competition in rural areas and the change of the political makeup of the commission (replacing republican with democrat) will probably keep any merger from happening


Most rural users want satellite and want locals, too. Locals for many rural areas are well down the list (some areas still have no SD locals, never mind HD). This gets worse after the DTV deadline, as digital broadcast doesn't go as far.

A combined company would be able to double the markets they can reach with the same bandwidth by removing all the duplicates. This would be of interest to the local broadcasters who would reach a bigger local audience, increasing their income.

As for price, a national price would prevent local gouging -- and keep monopoly cable companies from gouging themselves. Which they would hate, I suspect. Giving them access to NFL Season Ticket, etc, might balance that.

I have no idea if any of this will happen. I just find the "can't happen never ever" assumption unimaginative.


----------



## gully_foyle

bonscott87 said:


> As for the merger, I just don't see why. Both have what, 40 million receivers in use? You'd have to swap that 40 million at the cost of billions to migrate one to the other or swap all 80 million to go to a new service. I just can't see why they would do this.
> 
> And frankly if they were to swap over to the Dish system or if Charlie were in any way involved with the new company I would switch to Uverse or Charter with no hesitation.


There's the argument that DISH may have to replace most of those DVRs anyway.

As I said a while back, I expect DirecTV is the party that nixes the merger idea, not the Feds. Why should they? They hope to win outright.


----------



## harsh

kcmurphy88 said:


> There's the argument that DISH may have to replace most of those DVRs anyway.


If DISH and DIRECTV merged, D*'s agreement with TiVo would be out the window and the D* receivers would likely be found to be infringing.


----------



## Diana C

A couple of things jump out at me regarding this topic...

1) When last this idea was advanced, DirecTV was up for sale. GM was trying to sell DirecTV to finance their pension plans. This time around, DirecTV is owned by a corporation that sees no pressing reason to sell, and indeed has just invested large sums of money to solidify their ownership position.

2) One of the consumer benefits put forward in the original merger talks was the ability to provide LIL service, and ultimately HD LIL service, to the entire country. Well, here we are several years later and both services have managed to cover 95%+ of the population with SD locals, and have plans to cover 100% with HD locals within 24 months.

3) All that being said, if by some miracle a merger were to occur, there would be *no system wide hardware swaps*. It would be handled like XM/Sirius - both systems would continue to operate seperately and independantly. There MIGHT be some equipment swaps in some markets. IOW, some smaller markest could have their locals on DirecTV only, and some could have them on Dish Network only, but that's as far as I see the bandwidth efficiencies going. They don't need to merge bandwidth anymore. They have plenty available to them already.

4) Finally, the XM/Sirius merger was approved, at the end of the day, because a persuasive case was made that satellite radio was not going to be profitable for a long time...longer than either company could last. By merging, and ultimately eliminating duplication in the back office and some production, they could get to profitability before they ran out of money. This case can not be made for satellite TV since both services are currently profitable - despite having just made HUGE investments in new satellite infrastructure.

Echostar can "talk" about a merger all they want...unless Liberty starts talking too, it's just smoke.


----------



## harsh

Titan25 said:


> This time around, DirecTV is owned by a corporation that sees no pressing reason to sell, and indeed has just invested large sums of money to solidify their ownership position.


Make no mistake: Liberty is known for turning investments.


----------



## SHS

kcmurphy88 said:


> Most rural users want satellite and want locals, too. Locals for many rural areas are well down the list (some areas still have no SD locals, never mind HD). This gets worse after the DTV deadline, as digital broadcast doesn't go as far.
> 
> A combined company would be able to double the markets they can reach with the same bandwidth by removing all the duplicates. This would be of interest to the local broadcasters who would reach a bigger local audience, increasing their income.
> 
> As for price, a national price would prevent local gouging -- and keep monopoly cable companies from gouging themselves. Which they would hate, I suspect. Giving them access to NFL Season Ticket, etc, might balance that.
> 
> I have no idea if any of this will happen. I just find the "can't happen never ever" assumption unimaginative.


I was thinking the samething about that to by removing all the duplicates channel they have room for more HD Channel

Chinatown Dish dosen't have inferior receivers it DirecTV that has inferior receivers

Splitter are bad news which reduce the signal by around 3.5db (45% loss) per-port that with 2 way and you have use specially designed splitter with DirecTV SWM-8 Single Wire Multi-Switch.


----------



## Diana C

harsh said:


> Make no mistake: Liberty is known for turning investments.


True enough...but there would have to be sizable profit in doing so. How could such a deal be structured to make it attractive to Liberty, while maintaining both general stockholder value in both companies, and protect the interests of the officer-stockholders in DISH?

I mean, how much a premium could Dish pay for DirecTV before the stockholders of Dish revolt? Without a sizable premium, where is the benefit to Liberty?


----------



## Diana C

SHS said:


> I was thinking the samething about that to by removing all the duplicates channel they have room for more HD Channel.


Mass receiver replacements are too expensive for too little benefit. Ain't gonna happen.



SHS said:


> ...Dish dosen't have inferior receivers it DirecTV that has inferior receivers.


 That's like saying one service is "inferior" to the other. It's a matter of opinion, not fact. You have yours, I have mine, and everybody else has theirs. They both work well enough. (And yes, I have used both for several years each.)



SHS said:


> Splitter are bad news which reduce the signal by around 3.5db (45% loss) per-port that with 2 way and you have use specially designed splitter with DirecTV SWM-8 Single Wire Multi-Switch.


All true statements, but also all irrelevant. The system works and it works well. It allows a house that was pre-wired for cable TV within the last 5 years or so to be converted to satellite with almost no effort whatsoever beyond mounting a dish and running 4 wires to the SWM device.


----------



## SHS

Titan25 I don't think there have to do a mass receiver replacements they only need to do firmware update.
DirecTV is more "inferior" when it come to Thunderstorm my next door neighbor who did have DirecTV for 2 year who finally give up a few months back and got Dishnetwork even know I told me not get DirecTV but he didn't listen to me and I two have had DirecTV and found it not to not as good as Dishnetwork in long run.


----------



## Christopher Gould

harsh said:


> If DISH and DIRECTV merged, D*'s agreement with TiVo would be out the window and the D* receivers would likely be found to be infringing.


D* is now covered by buying Replay.


----------



## Christopher Gould

SHS said:


> Titan25 I don't think there have to do a mass receiver replacements they only need to do firmware update.
> DirecTV is more "inferior" when it come to Thunderstorm my next door neighbor who did have DirecTV for 2 year who finally give up a few months back and got Dishnetwork even know I told me not get DirecTV but he didn't listen to me and I two have had DirecTV and found it not to not as good as Dishnetwork in long run.


software upgrades more rain fade please thats spreading BS


----------



## EricRobins

Christopher Gould said:


> D* is now covered by buying Replay.


Owning Replay's IP would not avoid infringing TiVO's patents (unless they also purchased a license from TiVo).


----------



## Diana C

SHS said:


> Titan25 I don't think there have to do a mass receiver replacements they only need to do firmware update....


And you know this how? For HD, it may be possible, but for SD the hardware in the boxes is very different. At a minimum, they'd have about 7 or 8 million legacy boxes out there there were built before standardized chipsets were available.



SHS said:


> ...DirecTV is more "inferior" when it come to Thunderstorm my next door neighbor who did have DirecTV for 2 year who finally give up a few months back and got Dishnetwork even know I told me not get DirecTV but he didn't listen to me and I two have had DirecTV and found it not to not as good as Dishnetwork in long run.


As I said...your opinion. I had Dish Network for 7 years, and now I have DirecTV. I have two HD DVRs from DirecTV, and I love them. I prefer the DirecTV channel likeup, particularly WHICH channels are in HD. So, I think DirecTV is superior. That's MY opinion. YMMV.

Trying to make statements like "Dish Network is superior" sound like a fact is like saying "Vanilla is superior to chocolate" when we all know chocolate is best.


----------



## Diana C

harsh said:


> If DISH and DIRECTV merged, D*'s agreement with TiVo would be out the window and the D* receivers would likely be found to be infringing.


Depends on who acquires who on paper. If you recall, one of the scenarios for the merger last time around was that DirecTV actually be the surviving corporate entity, which was to be renamed "New Echostar."

A similar scheme this time would keep all DirecTV's current licenses intact.


----------



## Christopher Gould

EricRobins said:


> Owning Replay's IP would not avoid infringing TiVO's patents (unless they also purchased a license from TiVo).


i believe tivo and replay had some kind of agreement


----------



## SHS

Titan25 both Dish and DirecTV SD hardware is still base around MPEG2 decoder only the encryption was diff.


----------



## Jeffbat

Chinatown said:


> Yes, but then all Dish customers would be saddled with single tuner, inferior receivers, and all that extra wiring.
> 
> No thanks.


Wow guess I am delusional with Directv Dual Tuner Tivo units and My Dual Tuner HD DVR, if they are inferior I am happy where I am at. Directv beats Dish on so many fronts, start by comparing their programming.

As for possible merger, Sirius XM is def goin to pave the way. Their main argument was that people still have a choice of reg radio (FM and or AM), MP3 players etc. Even if Dish and Directv merged, people still have a choice of over the air (temp), cable, online content, etc. Its goin o be interesting.


----------



## Diana C

SHS said:


> Titan25 both Dish and DirecTV SD hardware is still base around MPEG2 decoder only the encryption was diff.


The way the digital data is encoded is also different. Dish network uses DVB, an open standard, and DirecTV uses a proprietary system. This why FTA receivers can receive and decode Dish program guides and transponder data, without even decrypting the signal, but the same can not be done for DirecTV. There are millions of DirecTV receivers that can't decode DVB and millions of Dish network receivers that can't decode the DirecTV signal.

The security systems are also different, and are based upon different smartcard software designs. I don't know if one could be switched to the other easily or not, and neither do you unless you have been privy to the internal design of both Nagravision and DSS.


----------



## Dave

Actually in my opinion this is the best thing to happen for DirectV. Can you imagine how much better they can be by being owned by Charlie? So I say yes this is a great idea for both. And if you look at the XM-Sirius merger, no body has to buy a new receiver unless they want to. So this could actually work to DirectV's advantage. So I say go for it Dish.


----------



## Smthkd

Dave said:


> Actually in my opinion this is the best thing to happen for DirectV. *Can you imagine how much better they can be by being owned by Charlie?* So I say yes this is a great idea for both. And if you look at the XM-Sirius merger, no body has to buy a new receiver unless they want to. So this could actually work to DirectV's advantage. So I say go for it Dish.


Owned by Charlie? Are you smoking something? Liberty Media is the Giant here not Dish!!!


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Smthkd said:


> Owned by Charlie? Are you smoking something? Liberty Media is the Giant here not Dish!!!


Smaller companies buy out larger companies all the time. It's about available cash and financials, not necessarily perceived "value" or size of the companies.


----------



## bonscott87

That may be true but Malone makes more money in a month then Charlie even dreams about in a year.


----------



## Dave

So this is why Charlie is a BILLIONAIRE many times over? As stated Charlie would do a much better job in my opinion running DirectV than the current owners. Remember the current owners of DirectV are in it for the money. Just look at there new business practices to see what and where they are starting to operate the business of DirectV. Murdock was in it for the money also. Thats why he changed the business model and direction of the company. My first prediction, that Murdock would make when he took over was that he would build his own DVR and dump Tivo. That happened rather quickly. So please do rememeber that DirectV will have more changes coming there way. Some of you will like and some will not like. This is why I feel that Charlie's business model would be better for us the customer at DirectV. I do understand that any company is in it for the money. Some business managers also look out for us the customer in a better way. I do not believe that the current management at DirectV is going to watch out for the customer in a good way.


----------



## loudo

I like the two company system. Competition is good for the market. Yes, there would be competition in the metro area that have cable systems, but in the rural areas, with C-Band almost history, it would make the one DBS system, the only game in town.

Merging the two systems wouldn't be much advantage, unless all of one companies equipment was dumped, as they each use two different Video Encryption formats. That would be very expensive to change all the equipment of the customers of one of the companies, in order to use just one set of satellites. But, if they ever did, you wouldn't hear about lack of bandwidth, for a long time to come.


----------



## harsh

Remember that Liberty's stake in DIRECTV is not total. Seems to me that it was going to be less than 40% when all was said and done.


----------



## Draconis

Another update on the matter.

Dish-DirecTV Deal Won't Fool Feds
http://www.thestreet.com/story/10432145/1/dish-directv-deal-wont-fool-feds.html



> "In rural America, a merger would still be two [companies in the field]-to-one. Two-to-one mergers are unlawful under U.S. antitrust law,"


----------



## Jhon69

Well I know if Charlie Ergen was to take over DirecTV it would save me money.I would go back to OTA and Basic Cable faster than you can say"Dishnotwork"!.


----------



## mike1977

I don't want to see them merge. Having competition is good...I'm dropping Directv to get Turbo HD Bronze on Dish Network. I've paid too much for too long all for seeing popups during programming.


----------



## TheRatPatrol

mike1977 said:


> I don't want to see them merge. Having competition is good...I'm dropping Directv to get Turbo HD Bronze on Dish Network. I've paid too much for too long all for seeing popups during programming.


What pop ups?


----------



## Diana C

Dave said:


> So this is why Charlie is a BILLIONAIRE many times over? As stated Charlie would do a much better job in my opinion running DirectV than the current owners. Remember the current owners of DirectV are in it for the money...


And you think Charlie is in it for the good for mankind? 

Being "in it for the money" is a good thing. The money comes from the viewers, so to make more money you have to deliver more value and/or get more customers. You do that by providing what people want to buy. How is this anything but good for the customer (you know, you and me)?


----------



## mike1977

theratpatrol said:


> What pop ups?


You know when programming comes back from commercials? Stations have been doing it for years promoting upcoming programming.


----------



## bonscott87

mike1977 said:


> You know when programming comes back from commercials? Stations have been doing it for years promoting upcoming programming.


So what does that have to do with DirecTV?


----------



## mike1977

I don't see paying Directv $69.99 when I can pay Dish $24.99 for seeing the same promo infested shows.


----------



## loudo

mike1977 said:


> I don't see paying Directv $69.99 when I can pay Dish $24.99 for seeing the same promo infested shows.


??? Please, explain what you are talking about.


----------



## bonscott87

Especially since $24.99 a month only gets you 25 channels...period. No locals and no RSN. I guess if those 25 channels are all you watch then by all means go for it.

So then for 32.99 you get 5 more channels.
39.99 gets you 7 more channels.
Then add $10 more for 7 more channels.
Oh, and HD locals cost $5 more.
Ooops, gotta add 4.60 for HD DVR fee. That's just *one* by the way. If I actually want 2 DVRs add another $13 a month. (Man, this is sounding a lot like cable for some reason).

*So to get even a decent amount of channels I'm up to $60 right there for less then 50 channels and your locals. So for a lousy $12 a month more with DirecTV I get more HD channels, my locals and a couple hundred SD channels as well.
Gee, I wonder which one is the better deal?  *

Oh, if I want no commitment add $20 per month (gee, that's not talked about much, Ouch). I'll have to remember that one when the commitment freaks come out of the woodwork.

Again, I guess if you're happy with just the 25 channels offered and NO SD channels and NO locals and NO RSN then 24.99 may be a good deal for you. But none of their HD only packages look like any kind of good deal to me.


----------



## James Long

bonscott87 said:


> *Gee, I wonder which one is the better deal?  *


The better deal is the one that the individual customer wants. Sometimes the best deal isn't available. One can't pick and choose exact channels. But at least with separate companies people have a choice between more deals. *They can choose the deal that best suits their needs.*

And that's the point for this thread ... without indulging in off topic "mine's better" or counting discussion. Merged you have one company that has one set of plans. Unmerged you have competition. If you like DirecTV's plans - fine ... just imagine a merger where all of their plans go away and you have to buy channels based on DISH Network's marketing and negotiations. If you like DISH Network's plans - fine ... imagine the opposite.

With a merger there is a good chance that neither side will "win". Competition is good.


----------



## Chinatown

SHS said:


> I was thinking the samething about that to by removing all the duplicates channel they have room for more HD Channel
> 
> Chinatown Dish dosen't have inferior receivers it DirecTV that has inferior receivers
> 
> Splitter are bad news which reduce the signal by around 3.5db (45% loss) per-port that with 2 way and you have use specially designed splitter with DirecTV SWM-8 Single Wire Multi-Switch.


You must have read my reply to fast. I had Direct. Their receivers are the reason I switched

"Yes, but then all Dish customers would be saddled with single tuner, inferior receivers, and all that extra wiring."

No thanks.


----------



## mike1977

loudo said:


> ??? Please, explain what you are talking about.


My Directv bill is $69.99. I'm paying that to see popup promos during shows on Scifi, USA...and TBS and TNT, etc. when I intentionally turn to those channels once in a blue moon, etc.

With Dish, I'll still be seeing Scifi, etc. infest their programming with promos after the commercials...but I'll be paying less for that after I switch to Dish's Bronze plan.


----------



## bonscott87

James Long said:


> The better deal is the one that the individual customer wants. Sometimes the best deal isn't available. One can't pick and choose exact channels. But at least with separate companies people have a choice between more deals. *They can choose the deal that best suits their needs.*
> 
> And that's the point for this thread ... without indulging in off topic "mine's better" or counting discussion. Merged you have one company that has one set of plans. Unmerged you have competition. If you like DirecTV's plans - fine ... just imagine a merger where all of their plans go away and you have to buy channels based on DISH Network's marketing and negotiations. If you like DISH Network's plans - fine ... imagine the opposite.
> 
> With a merger there is a good chance that neither side will "win". Competition is good.


I agree with everything you say. I want competition as well.

I'm only pointing out that if the guy truly just wants 25 channels for 25 bucks then by all means if he only cares about just those 25 channels. The comparison I made was simply that with DirecTV you can get a whole lot more channels for not much more money. Or with one of Dish's everything packs plus HD added. These HD only packs just aren't all that awesome, unless again you really only care about the limited channel selection included.


----------



## bonscott87

mike1977 said:


> My Directv bill is $69.99. I'm paying that to see popup promos during shows on Scifi, USA...and TBS and TNT, etc. when I intentionally turn to those channels once in a blue moon, etc.
> 
> With Dish, I'll still be seeing Scifi, etc. infest their programming with promos after the commercials...but I'll be paying less for that after I switch to Dish's Bronze plan.


Excellent. But are those limited 25 channels all you watch? If so then again, congrats and have fun.


----------



## loudo

mike1977 said:


> My Directv bill is $69.99. I'm paying that to see popup promos during shows on Scifi, USA...and TBS and TNT, etc. when I intentionally turn to those channels once in a blue moon, etc.
> 
> With Dish, I'll still be seeing Scifi, etc. infest their programming with promos after the commercials...but I'll be paying less for that after I switch to Dish's Bronze plan.


I would want more variety of programing to choose from, but if it works for you go for it.


----------



## James Long

bonscott87 said:


> The comparison I made was simply that with DirecTV you can get a whole lot more channels for not much more money.


If this were one of those "mine's bigger" or channel count threads I'd have a lot more to say about that. Suffice it to say that if all you care about is HD paying $62.98 and up to DirecTV Choice w/HD isn't as good of a deal as paying $44.99 for the comparable TurboHD Silver package. Neither is paying $72.99 for DirecTV Choice Plus HD DVR instead of $49.99 for the comparable TurboHD Gold DVR Advantage package.

The important point for this thread is that there is a choice. You CAN pay DISH $22/$23 less and not get SD channels you don't want ... and you CAN choose to drop down to a $24.99 HD package if you want. You can also pay hundreds more to DirecTV and get everything. With a merger the options could easily go away.


----------



## Lord Vader

I'm not surprised to see so many people yell, "Merger!" just because the FCC finally(!) approved the merger of XM and Sirius. Do people here really believe that DISH and DirecTV will merge? Come on now, folks. Let's get real here. While no one can say they'd _*never*_ merge, the odds are probably less than 10%, if that.

First, we're talking about a different industry. Second, and perhaps more importantly, the XM/Sirius review took a ridiculously looooooong period of time for Justice Dept. review then the FCC's review. This would mean that we'd be talking, from today's date, three to five years at the *soonest* such a merger would happen. Figure at least 3 years from the date the companies would announce a merger attempt. They're not even doing that half seriously *now*, so this merger talk is nothing more than a few folks' wet dreams.


----------



## mike1977

loudo said:


> I would want more variety of programing to choose from, but if it works for you go for it.


I counted 26 in the Bronze:

1. A&E 2. ABC Family 3. Cartoon Network 4. Food Network 5. HD Theater 6. HD Net 7. HGTV 8. History 9. Lifetime 10. CNBC 11. CNN 12. Discovery Channel 13. Dish on demand 14. PPV (or more than 1 pay per view channel in HD?) 15. Disney Channel 16. ESPN 17. ESPN2 18. ESPNews 19. Palladia 20. Scifi 21. TBS 22. TLC 23. TNT 24. Travel channel 25. The Law & Order Channel (USA Network...lol) 26. The Weather Channel

Ok...I guess it's really 24 not counting pay per view channels.

I will have more variety though...I subscribe to Netflix, and also get digital broadcast channels with antenna.

:lol:


----------



## Draconis

I found an interesting quote from John Malone in another article.

Liberty Media signals interest in AOL's dial-up business
http://www.betanews.com/article/Liberty_Media_signals_interest_in_AOLs_dialup_business/1218564631



> "I don't understand why the journalists all of a sudden discovered the potential of a merger of Echo with Direct," he commented. "We have talked about it frequently in the past, it would be very synergistic if it were doable. However, we don't see that the regulatory environment has changed since the last time we made comments on the subject and we think it will be problematic to try and merge the two companies at the current regulatory environment."


----------



## FogCutter

kstuart said:


> Note that the XM-Sirius merger vote was 3 Republicans For, 2 Democrats Against.
> 
> A betting man would bet that in the future, the FCC will be a majority of Democrats.
> 
> I doubt that we will see any big mergers of any sort of companies in the next few years, even where the FCC is not involved...


Wisdom itself.


----------



## mike1977

Finally got Dish Network installed today. Last Saturday it was raining from that tropical storm, and I was told they ran out of the receivers.

Yeah, I told the Directv rep I was cancelling account because I had Dish installed with one of their new all HD packages and it was cheaper.

Got the VIP612


----------



## jclewter79

mike1977 said:


> Finally got Dish Network installed today. Last Saturday it was raining from that tropical storm, and I was told they ran out of the receivers.
> 
> Yeah, I told the Directv rep I was cancelling account because I had Dish installed with one of their new all HD packages and it was cheaper.
> 
> Got the VIP612


I am glad you got want you wanted, I hope you are happy with the new service.


----------



## lee635

What if you look at it this way: Look at the current line up and pricing scheme for whichever provider you are not using at present. If the new company would continue to offer that exact same lineup, but at say 10% less cost than the current price, would you switch?

If yes, then maybe the merger is a good idea, if not then maybe the merger isn't a good idea. For me a 10% cut wouldn't be enough to switch. I know there are many other variants out there, but this sort of a test where you hold all things equal, except for one variable, is quite useful to ferreting out decision points.

Also what if a merger were approved, but the new company were required to free up satellite assets and return them for someone else to use? Let's say that 80% of the satellite bandwidth must be returned from the freed-up space from not having to duplicate the same channels on two providers, You sometimes see this in merger agreements where the combined company must sell of certain assets in order to gain approval. Then, maybe another provider might emerge?


----------



## ivtech

mike1977 said:


> I counted 26 in the Bronze:
> 
> 1. A&E 2. ABC Family 3. Cartoon Network 4. Food Network 5. HD Theater 6. HD Net 7. HGTV 8. History 9. Lifetime 10. CNBC 11. CNN 12. Discovery Channel 13. Dish on demand 14. PPV (or more than 1 pay per view channel in HD?) 15. Disney Channel 16. ESPN 17. ESPN2 18. ESPNews 19. Palladia 20. Scifi 21. TBS 22. TLC 23. TNT 24. Travel channel 25. The Law & Order Channel (USA Network...lol) 26. The Weather Channel
> 
> Ok...I guess it's really 24 not counting pay per view channels.
> 
> I will have more variety though...I subscribe to Netflix, and also get digital broadcast channels with antenna.
> 
> :lol:


You forgot 340 ENCRW move in HD


----------



## cweave02

Lord Vader said:


> I'm not surprised to see so many people yell, "Merger!" just because the FCC finally(!) approved the merger of XM and Sirius. Do people here really believe that DISH and DirecTV will merge? Come on now, folks. Let's get real here. While no one can say they'd _*never*_ merge, the odds are probably less than 10%, if that.


XM and Sirius were not healthy financially so it was only merger for survival. I think Dish and D* have plenty of revenue to sustain themselves independently of each other.


----------



## dcowboy7

swanni predicts a directv/dish merger in 2009.


----------



## FTA Michael

Isn't that an annual thing for him?


----------



## Lord Vader

dcowboy7 said:


> swanni predicts a directv/dish merger in 2009.


Swanni (2008): "John McCain will win the presidency." "The Cubs will defeat the White Sox to win the World Series." "DirecTV will implement dual live buffer on their HD DVRs."

Swanni (2009): "DISH and DirecTV will merge."

!rolling


----------



## loudo

Lord Vader said:


> Swanni (2008): "John McCain will win the presidency." "The Cubs will defeat the White Sox to win the World Series." "DirecTV will implement dual live buffer on their HD DVRs."
> 
> Swanni (2009): "DISH and DirecTV will merge."
> 
> !rolling


Ya for sure. Considering in past record of the source I wouldn't worry about it.


----------



## joshjr

Lord Vader said:


> Swanni (2008): "John McCain will win the presidency." "The Cubs will defeat the White Sox to win the World Series." "DirecTV will implement dual live buffer on their HD DVRs."
> 
> Swanni (2009): "DISH and DirecTV will merge."
> 
> !rolling


Thats to funny.


----------



## James Long

FTA Michael said:


> Isn't that an annual thing for him?


Annual or anal? So easy to get words mixed up!


----------



## Dolly

After the Sirius XM nightmare I don't know why any one would even think about a Dish D* merger. It would be the same thing--different sats., different channel numbers, different accounting departments, different call centers, different websites etc. :girlscrea


----------



## convem24

The only way Dish would consider a merger is if they lost a lot of subscribers. I am 40%-50% in a few years from where their highest subscriber number was. And the other issue would be contracts, etc, etc. I agree a new Dish/Directv merged company could probably offer more HD (depending on the satellite positions and the viability of a multi dish system) than any other provider but the real winning would be in overhead. They could let go of about 1/3 of the combined corporate support group because of some redundancy. I think Swanni is wrong but the idea always comes about. Directv is the healthier of the two companies. I think the next year will tell a merger will be needed. Swanni will be wrong on this one again. Charlie and Chase are not friends.


----------



## jclewter79

I hope they do so I can get some widgets on my 722.


----------



## Lord Vader

I doubt DISH would ever merge unless Charlie was still in charge. I can't see him giving up power so easily.


----------



## toadfacedfrump

From what I've read in my Business Week mag subscription awhile back, USA Today and online, Mr. Ergen would rather go bankrupt than merge with Direct - he is a very proud man. I am worried about the Tivo case, as I seem to remember a preliminary ruling that went against Dish. Also, with Mr. Murdoch still alive and wanting more feathers in his cap, you have to wonder what is going on in the U.S. satellite market. Murdoch has had his eye on the U.S. for awhile, and I'm surprised he hasn't gotten a market share yet. Or have I missed something and he does have a market presence in America? I believe he rules the UK, Europe as well as Eurasia countries.


----------



## Christopher Gould

toadfacedfrump said:


> From what I've read in my Business Week mag subscription awhile back, USA Today and online, Mr. Ergen would rather go bankrupt than merge with Direct - he is a very proud man. I am worried about the Tivo case, as I seem to remember a preliminary ruling that went against Dish. Also, with Mr. Murdoch still alive and wanting more feathers in his cap, you have to wonder what is going on in the U.S. satellite market. Murdoch has had his eye on the U.S. for awhile, and I'm surprised he hasn't gotten a market share yet. Or have I missed something and he does have a market presence in America? I believe he rules the UK, Europe as well as Eurasia countries.


u missed it, he owned Directv and sold it


----------



## harsh

Christopher Gould said:


> u missed it, he owned Directv and sold it


That chestnut only works well on April 1st.


----------



## Shades228

He was talking about Rupert Murdock aka News Corp. They infact had controlling rights and traded it to to Liberty.


----------



## harsh

Shades228 said:


> He was talking about Rupert Murdock aka News Corp. They infact had controlling rights and traded it to to Liberty.


Ah, I understand now. The part that had me stymied was that News Corp didn't own DIRECTV. Rupert's company had a very large interest in DIRECTV, but I don't think it ever exceeded 35%. Liberty owns considerably more shares that News Corp did and they still don't "own" the company.

Nonetheless, it is absolutely true that Rupert dipped his toe in the US market and found it to be quite disagreeable.


----------



## TheRatPatrol

harsh said:


> Nonetheless, it is absolutely true that Rupert dipped his toe in the US market and found it to be quite disagreeable.


And its been reported that he regrets selling it now. I kind of wish he would have kept it, we probably would have had more HD's by now.


----------

