Dish and DirecTV once again in talks despite antitrust.

[navychop]

I hope not.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

It's going to happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BarnRat]

I hope not.

I'm ignorant of this proposed merger but since the satellite market is shrinking it seems like it would be a good thing to do. Why don't you think so? Just curious.

Would there then be redundant satellites, in case of a failure?

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

I'm ignorant of this proposed merger but since the satellite market is shrinking it seems like it would be a good thing to do. Why don't you think so? Just curious.

Would there then be redundant satellites, in case of a failure?

My guess is DIRECTV DVR's dont have a red record light either.

 

[John2021]

wonders who would run it dtv or el cheapo charlie. no red lights on the dvr's plus long black outs

 

[charlesrshell]

It's going to happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I hope Charlie still runs the show!!

 

[John2021]

I hope Charlie still runs the show!!

i could see that now. can you imagine how many dtv subs would leave after the long black outs... talk about pissing in someones cherrios

 

[navychop]

I don't like the DTV system. May not matter, because I suspect both will be run together if there's a merger. I just feel that taking over DTV is an emotional thing with Charlie. I expect it would be cheaper to let DTV fail and buy their satellites and maybe ground stations on the cheap. No need to take on debt or other obligations. Not likely to be major bidders at such an auction.

And many/most of the remaining DTV customers will come over to Dish anyway. And there'd be only the one s/w set to maintain. One system, not two.

 

[John2021]

My guess is DIRECTV DVR's dont have a red record light either.

one word comes to mind if they merge monopoly

 

[John2021]

I don't like the DTV system. May not matter, because I suspect both will be run together if there's a merger. I just feel that taking over DTV is an emotional thing with Charlie. I expect it would be cheaper to let DTV fail and buy their satellites and maybe ground stations on the cheap. No need to take on debt or other obligations. Not likely to be major bidders at such an auction.

And many/most of the remaining DTV customers will come over to Dish anyway. And there'd be only the one s/w set to maintain. One system, not two.

while i hate the dtv system. they do have channels that dish don't!!! i would let one go bankrupt and buy it on the cheap cause it's not worth anything in todays world.. why ATT want's 70% of it is beyond me. isn't charlies $$$ tied up in 5G??? i don't know of anyone that would want them..

 

[TheKrell]

It's going to happen.

I presume such a merger would necessitate running both technologies in parallel for awhile. Then what?

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

one word comes to mind if they merge monopoly

That was a concern before but with Streaming as it is, there is plenty of cometition and that would be non concern now. Look at Sirius and XM.

 

[raoul5788]

My guess is DIRECTV DVR's dont have a red record light either.

They are amber!

 

[Jon J]

Having had both systems, the DISH Hopper stands head and shoulders above anything The DarkStar can offer.

 

[Bruce]

And many/most of the remaining DTV customers will come over to Dish anyway.

Considering that DirecTV has lost 12 million subs, based on that logic, DISH should have a lot more subscribers then.

What will happen if they merge, as of now, DirecTV loses 500,000 a quarter-up, DISH loses 200,000-up.

So, then they will lose 700,000-up a quarter, merger will not stop those leaving.

 

[raoul5788]

Having had both systems, the DISH Hopper stands head and shoulders above anything The DarkStar can offer.

The workings of Dish equipment is better, but their UI is clunky at best. And their sports channel selections suck.

 

[Jon J]

Neither of the "buts" you cite affect me at all.

 

[SamCdbs]

I'm ignorant of this proposed merger but since the satellite market is shrinking it seems like it would be a good thing to do. Why don't you think so? Just curious.

Before streaming, Dish and DirecTV were aimed at opposite ends of the market. Always have been, always will be. "Good TV. Better TV. DirecTV." or the current "Stop compromising. No one has more (blank) than DirecTV." Contrasted with "SAVE!!!!!" which seems to be Dish's only mantra.

For all the ho-ha from the uninformed, Charlie knows that there will ALWAYS be a market for linear TV and there will ALWAYS be people in rural areas who the cable bandits won't serve, or serve properly, the government's and Musk's promises of internet access are always a day away. And there will ALWAYS be bars and such that need only access to sports feeds and don't want nor need internet service. Charlie wants that business, which will be profitable, for himself, with no competition. He sees a government more pliant to such things (Big Media will be for it) and a market that is not a trifecta (three choices for 99%, cable or one of the DBS systems) like the last time he tried this, but rather with maybe a dozen linear streaming cable replacements (YTTV, etc) or just do without and enjoy counting your money while you watch reruns on Netflix.

Its not good, because for rural people, it is not even a trifecta, but a dichotomy. Dish or DirecTV. That's it, and that always will be it.

But mostly its not good because of that first thing. The two are aimed at different people. The opposite ends of the market. I'm not out to save on my entertainment. I don't want to see channels come and go because they are in some idiot "dispute". I want EVERYTHING, in HD perfection. Thus I have DirecTV and supplement it with ALL the major streaming services. I'm not out to save money. I don't want to spend six months without the channels I want so I can then save 4 cents on my bill (because Cheap Charlie is really passing that savings on to me, right?) I will never get those six months of my life back. I want luxury TV, and that is DirecTV, supplemented with streaming.

If Dish were my only choice, and I had internet that worked, why not watch Pluto and Stirr? Its free, and its the same thing as Dish. Random mix of channels, less than everything. Background noise, really.

Would there then be redundant satellites, in case of a failure?

The two systems are totally incompatible. If they merged, they are not going to send out millions of guys to replace all of the DirecTV boxes and dishes.

 

[nelson61]

If they merged, the dynamics of local transmission negotiations changes. Today, the broadcasters play Dish off against Direct with customers switching after blackouts.
Combining would significantly improve the pricing control power of the satellite provider. Probably a somewhat similar effect for some of the other program packages.

 

[Bruce]

Its not good, because for rural people, it is not even a trifecta, but a dichotomy. Dish or DirecTV. That's it, and that always will be it.

I do wonder how many in rural areas subscribe.

I google'd how many Rural Households in the United States, average number was 20 million, if everyone in those areas subscribed to Satellite, they would have 3 million more who subscribe. ( as of now, DirecTV Satellite is under 10 Million, Dish, roughly, 7 Million).

Then of course, how many subscribe in Urban areas, if a 70/30 split, that is almost 12 million in urban, 5 million in Rural.

Then what do the other 15 million in rural areas do for TV, then how many get broadband, for example, I live in a rural area, but I have broadband thanks to the Federal and Florida State Government tossing money at Charter.

The point is, I do not believe Rural areas are the big money for Satellite as many think it is.