# It's official: FCC OKs NewsCorp's acquisition of DirecTV



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

This just in from Reuters:

WASHINGTON, Dec 19 (Reuters) - The Federal Communications Commission on Friday has conditionally given the green light for media giant News Corp. to gain control of the No. 1 U.S. satellite service DirecTV, an FCC official familiar with the matter said.

The Republican-led commission voted 3-2 to let the deal proceed, with the two Democrats on the panel voting against it, the source said.

An FCC spokesman had no immediate comment.


----------



## Roger (Aug 7, 2002)

What kind of changes would one expect out of this? I'm in a market for a PVR so I need to find this out.


----------



## Bill R (Dec 20, 2002)

The word is that Murdoch is really going to push DVRs. The question is: are they going to be TiVos or his own DVR (like the ones he is using on his other systems). I think that is will be TiVos first but down the road subscribers may have a choice of his DVR or TiVos.

A sidenote: CNBC is saying that this deal will help the DISH Network since it validates satellite as a major platform for delivering (programming) content. CNBC also said that both DBS companies most likely will go after cable subscribers rather than each other's subscribers (reported by Jerry Cobb, CNBC).

Many Wall Street analyst are also saying the same thing. They do not see this as a bad thing for DISH and actually expect them to pick up more subscribers from cable once Murdoch takes over DirecTV and directs his ad campaign at cable subscribers.


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

Now lets see Rupert get D* subs Comcast Sports Net Philly.....PLEASE Rupe make this one of your first moves...


----------



## PSB (Oct 4, 2002)

Big Changes Lads! This will be good news for customers who want the latest technology but it will cost extra, but all in its a great thing for DirecTV customers. (SKYDirecTV) I am sure he will want to get the Sky part in someplace! 2004 Is going to be a fun year!


----------



## Dave (Jan 29, 2003)

Actually it might not be as good as deal as everyone believes it to be. The FCC is not requiring Murdoch to guarantee locals to any markets.


----------



## JohnL (Apr 1, 2002)

This is a very bad thing for consumers and DBS subscribers. The reason the largest cable company's service is pricey and customer service is so bad is because they are vertically integrated, in other words they own vast blocks of the very content they are delivering. Meaning it doesn't matter if they deliver the content or sombody else does they will still make money just not as much. The current distribution methods and the Federal governments weakening of the Media ownership rules is a very omen for the future. This industry in the end will be in the hands of fewer and fewer delivery systems and the content will be owned by fewer and fewer corporations competition is turning into a Illusion. Dish Network and several other smaller Cable companies are the last corporations that are pure delivery systems.

This allows these cable companies to pocket vast sums of money in subscription fees and at the same time DEMAND huge premiums from other third party providers. Rupert could do and is likely to the very same thing, with his bundle of Regional Sport Networks as well as his OTA Fox network, as well as a half a dozen of other fox owned Cable networks.


----------



## Ronmort (Apr 23, 2002)

I hope this is good, but I am inclined to wait and see for myself. One good thing, I can go back to cable or Dish Network if it's not so good. I sure hope Comcast Philadelphia signs on with Directv. That would be a big plus for me.


----------



## spanishannouncetable (Apr 23, 2002)

Dave said:


> Actually it might not be as good as deal as everyone believes it to be. The FCC is not requiring Murdoch to guarantee locals to any markets.


This is from Page 14 of the FCC announcement -

"In order to ensure that Applicants live up to their commitment to achieve the important public interest benefit of increased local channel service, we require, as a condition of our license transfer approval, that, by year end 2004, Applicants provide local channel service in an additional 30 DMAs beyond what had been previously funded, projected or planned by Hughes/DirecTV."

So Directv HAS to keep all the markets they have on right now, all the markets they've announced for the future, and add another 30 previously unannounced markets by the end of 2004.

Sounds like a good deal to me


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

JohnL said:


> This is a very bad thing for consumers and DBS subscribers. The reason the largest cable company's service is pricey and customer service is so bad is because they are vertically integrated, in other words they own vast blocks of the very content they are delivering. Meaning it doesn't matter if they deliver the content or sombody else does they will still make money just not as much. The current distribution methods and the Federal governments weakening of the Media ownership rules is a very omen for the future. This industry in the end will be in the hands of fewer and fewer delivery systems and the content will be owned by fewer and fewer corporations competition is turning into a Illusion. Dish Network and several other smaller Cable companies are the last corporations that are pure delivery systems.
> 
> This allows these cable companies to pocket vast sums of money in subscription fees and at the same time DEMAND huge premiums from other third party providers. Rupert could do and is likely to the very same thing, with his bundle of Regional Sport Networks as well as his OTA Fox network, as well as a half a dozen of other fox owned Cable networks.


Rupert promised as part of the conditions that he wouldnt play any funny games with ANYONE...Rupert wont be dancing around the rules/conditions placed upon him. Rupe is no Charlie Ergan he has respect for any FCC rules/conditions  This deal is great for us D* subs. The next few months should prove interesting


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Under Rupert's ownership, D* will put a much higher priority on adding new LiLs, which is what drives new subscription growth. PVRs are a priority, but development-to-market lead time will delay introduction of newer feature-rich models, particularly HD recorders. D*'s HD package will continue to be a token offering until two things occur - higher number of HD channels and a wider array of HD programming is available. National rollout of HD will deferred until all the pieces are in place. 

Hmmm... sounds familiar.


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

Nick said:


> Hmmm... sounds familiar.


Except DirecTV has had a good history of actually executing their business plans (and that is without Murdoch).


----------



## Guest (Dec 22, 2003)

Mark Holtz said:


> This just in from Reuters:
> 
> WASHINGTON, Dec 19 (Reuters) - The Federal Communications Commission on Friday has conditionally given the green light for media giant News Corp. to gain control of the No. 1 U.S. satellite service DirecTV, an FCC official familiar with the matter said.
> 
> ...


Well, it should be very interesting now that Rupert Murdoch gets control of DirecTV. Facinating as well, that he beat out Chas in this latest battle of the Sat Titans.

This disclaimer, I'm a DISH customer, have been since 1998. But I doubt DirecTV customers will have much to worry about. Look at all the other Newscorp holdings, FOX News, and their local stations for example. All are strongly customer oriented, hence the reason for their popularity.

Rupert didn't outsmart Chas, but he did outplay him. Chas tried to buy it all, and frankly I believe he regrets previous actions with the FCC. Rupert simply proved he's the better dealmaker when it involves the government and government agencies. It wasn't about poker, it was about business. There is a difference, as Chas is finding out.

Both will continue to be unofficial allies in the fight against cable, they remain the enemy and I truly believe efforts will be focused on cutting the wires that bind.

And if anyone believes for an instant that Charlie won't be able to compete against the behemoth that is Newscorp AND cable, hasn't paid much attention to history. DISH is 9-million + customers strong, and will continue to grow. Doubtful now however, if he'll ever be #1 in DBS, Newscorp simply too strong.

The big questions is, does Charlie continue to go it alone. He's loath to reliquish control of his company to anyone as long as he's around. Nothing to do with money and everything to do with strong personal pride.

So I believe he will end up partnering with someone, it won't be a traditional partner as we folks on in the hinterlands think. As with anything involving Charlie, it will be a surprise. That what makes him fun.

But he'll have to partner with someone, if for no other reason than to get some fresh thinking (and cash) into the company. Chas has bluffed and bullied his way so far, now we get to find out just how smart he really is.

Should be fun, in the meantime, I'll stick with DISH.


----------



## BobMurdoch (Apr 24, 2002)

Also, both of these guys have a history, and not a good one. Charlie nailed him good after a failed merger attempt a few years back that got a huge settlement out of Rupert and they both don't like each other.

Either way, it should be fun as Charlie will now face an ego just as big as his. It's gonna be like the Yankees and the Red Sox once Rupe takes over.


----------



## Guest (Dec 22, 2003)

First thing I expect Rupert will do is call off his relationship with Tivo and manufacture his own DVR's to compete with what Dish is doing.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

We will have to see, but the possibility is there that we may have a timer-based DVR as well as a DirecTivo. The churn rate for DVR subscribers is much lower than regular DBS subscribers. In addition, the DirecTivo is a significant subscriber base, and DirecTV has been trying to increase it by selling off the 40GB DirecTiVos at $99. Demand for those has been so great that there are shortages, and existing customer simply can't order it off DirecTV's site.


----------



## BobMurdoch (Apr 24, 2002)

Mark Holtz said:


> This just in from Reuters:
> 
> WASHINGTON, Dec 19 (Reuters) - The Federal Communications Commission on Friday has conditionally given the green light for media giant News Corp. to gain control of the No. 1 U.S. satellite service DirecTV, an FCC official familiar with the matter said.
> 
> ...


SkyRetailer also said that Justice has blessed the marriage as well. I'm not seeing this mentioned on any other sites, but GM is moving to close the deal this week so it must be happening.....


----------



## Guest (Dec 22, 2003)

BobMurdoch said:


> Also, both of these guys have a history, and not a good one. Charlie nailed him good after a failed merger attempt a few years back that got a huge settlement out of Rupert and they both don't like each other.
> 
> Either way, it should be fun as Charlie will now face an ego just as big as his. It's gonna be like the Yankees and the Red Sox once Rupe takes over.


It's important to keep in mind that yes, they do have a history. But it's never been personal. I'll bet you a PPV movie coupon that one of the first people to call Mr. Murdoch was Charlie. What makes both successful, is that while they are as tough as it gets, they don't let it ever become personal.

They are members of a rare breed that during the day fight it out tooth and nail, then can get together for a cocktail that evening. It's what sets them apart from mere mortals like us!

Ted Turner is an example of a guy who ultimately let it become personal. It caused him to make bad decisions, and he lost control of an empire he founded.

Rupert Murdoch has proved he can adapt and survive to an ever-changing business and political climate. He is both feared and respected around the world.

Jury is still very much out on Charlie Ergen. A brilliant and visionary man, without a doubt. I wouldn't bet against him, if he has the ultimate and rarest of knacks, learning from his mistakes.


----------



## BobMurdoch (Apr 24, 2002)

Earl Zuberbelt said:


> Jury is still very much out on Charlie Ergen. A brilliant and visionary man, without a doubt. I wouldn't bet against him, if he has the ultimate and rarest of knacks, learning from his mistakes.


I don't know about THAT. If he did, he would have increased the size of his engineering dept. by 25% so there would be more bugbusters to get his receivers out in time and with less gremlins....... :grin:


----------



## Guest (Dec 22, 2003)

BobMurdoch said:


> I don't know about THAT. If he did, he would have increased the size of his engineering dept. by 25% so there would be more bugbusters to get his receivers out in time and with less gremlins....... :grin:


Good point Bob! Are you talking 25% more engineers, or 25% better engineers?

I'm still surprised some folks running that group are around, especially rolling out the 921 at CES last January, and maybe having it available to more than 10 people the following January!


----------



## BobMurdoch (Apr 24, 2002)

I'm thinking understaffed given Charlie's legendary frugality. Not to say that an infusion of some more "high bandwidth" people as Bill Gates likes to call them wouldn't hurt either. (And no jokes about Microsoft... I know they are just as messed up..... just trying to borrow a concept I heard him speak about once).


----------



## Brett (Jan 14, 2003)

DCSholtis said:


> Now lets see Rupert get D* subs Comcast Sports Net Philly.....PLEASE Rupe make this one of your first moves...


It doesnt seem possible. As part of NewsCorp's deal to buy DirecTV, they cannot withhold stations from cable companies and other competing providers.

Thus, Fox has no leverage to get Comcast SportsNet Philly up. Comcast can withhold channels from them (the land delivered channels), but Fox cannot withhold channels from Comcast. Arbitration and FCC review could be meaningless. FCC has already decided that Comcast doesnt need to deliver its SportsNet channel to the satellite companies. While numerous small funded local stations have provided the satellite companies a quality signal, Comcast doesnt have to provide any signal of SportsNet to the satellite companies. Thank the FCC for these unfair terms.

In general, It doesnt seem a good deal for the Fox Network. They could lose out on securing lucrative retransmission deals for them. If FX begins to wane in programming, Cablevision (or some other cable company) may chose to pull it instantly, and not have to worry that Fox will tie it to a local affiliate.

Although it may not be great for Fox, I think however this is good for the DirecTV division having NewsCorp being the owner.


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

The BEST part however is in the conditions, the FCC said that Directv can still bid on exclusive sports packages such as NFL Sunday Ticket, and possibly (Im hoping) MLB EI.


----------

