Comcast HDTV - Page 19 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 3Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #541 of 12047 Old 11-12-2005, 05:51 AM
Member
 
craigchev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Quincy
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
jimboG said it all,my thoughts exactly.they have to put many of the analog channels in the digital tier,the people who refuse to rent a box probably watch 3 to 4 channels,and those are local!leaving 25 analog channels would give plenty of hd room for at least the next 4 years.
craigchev is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #542 of 12047 Old 11-13-2005, 02:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Marcus Carr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Baltimore City
Posts: 8,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxman View Post

And this impresses you? We've had HD for how many years? Hundreds of channels, and among them a total of 3 hours of HD between 11pm and 8pm the following day (GMA and 1 soap opera). 2 1/2 hours total on the weekends (GMA & SNL) excluding sports.

Let's all look forward to 2006, when we've been promised "The Today Show". Maybe if we're lucky we'll get even ANOTHER show in HD in 2007!

I don't know if it "impresses" me or not. I was just pointing out some things that were left out, and I was only talking about the broadcast networks, not "hundreds" of channels.

YOU ARE READING AVS FORUM

Marcus Carr is offline  
post #543 of 12047 Old 11-19-2005, 11:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Marcus Carr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Baltimore City
Posts: 8,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
From an article about Universal HD:

"But there is one significant holdout among the operators: Comcast Corp., which has more than 1 million HDTV subscribers. The sticking point for Comcast is the 70- cent to 75- cent subscriber fee that most large operators are shelling out for the channel, according to sources close to the situation."

http://www.multichannel.com/article/...Special+Report

YOU ARE READING AVS FORUM

Marcus Carr is offline  
post #544 of 12047 Old 11-20-2005, 08:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
raidbuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Bel Air, MD
Posts: 1,638
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Carr View Post

From an article about Universal HD:

"But there is one significant holdout among the operators: Comcast Corp., which has more than 1 million HDTV subscribers. The sticking point for Comcast is the 70- cent to 75- cent subscriber fee that most large operators are shelling out for the channel, according to sources close to the situation."

http://www.multichannel.com/article/...Special+Report

Marcus: Thanks for the link.

So while we continue to wait for ESPN2HD, we now lose hope for UHD and certainly for HDNET, who wants even more per subscriber. That is really bad news.

While we do save money by not having an HD Tier, we also must counter that with the loss of new HD channels.

Am I over-reacting? I really thought prospects were good for UHD and ESPN2HD at least on the horizon.

Rats.

Rich N.
raidbuck is offline  
post #545 of 12047 Old 11-20-2005, 11:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
nathan_h's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 4,934
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Count me as a Comcast customer who would gladly pay more to get more. Might even stop me from moving to Dish once I move into a place where I can get access to the satellite.


nathan_h is online now  
post #546 of 12047 Old 11-20-2005, 12:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
raidbuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Bel Air, MD
Posts: 1,638
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I think Comcast doesn't understand the HD mindset. It is to optimize availability, not price. Most of their other customer bases want to optimize price. So it is different. I'm sure that if they went into negotiations with a plan that included a $1 a month increase in DVR lease cost as an offset for higher HD channel aquisition costs they could, without unduly upsetting the HD-DVR community, bring these channels to us. (Pretty weird, isn't it, many of us calling for price increases!). Maybe I'm just being simplistic.

Oh well, maybe it will all turn out OK, but meanwhile, ESPN2HD continues to show more events each week and we barely see it with the poor analog SD version.

Rich N.
raidbuck is offline  
post #547 of 12047 Old 11-20-2005, 01:55 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 45,876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by raidbuck View Post

I think Comcast doesn't understand the HD mindset. It is to optimize availability, not price. Most of their other customer bases want to optimize price. So it is different. I'm sure that if they went into negotiations with a plan that included a $1 a month increase in DVR lease cost as an offset for higher HD channel aquisition costs they could, without unduly upsetting the HD-DVR community, bring these channels to us. (Pretty weird, isn't it, many of us calling for price increases!). Maybe I'm just being simplistic.

Oh well, maybe it will all turn out OK, but meanwhile, ESPN2HD continues to show more events each week and we barely see it with the poor analog SD version.

Rich N.

The primary Comcast strategic business policy is to provide premium services and command premium subscriber dollars. This is why they have bumped Internet speeds from 3 to 4 to 6Mbps, this is why they are offering unlimited calling on VOIP for $40 a month, etc.

At the same time, they also don't want to pay additional costs for HD channels already carried in analog, or charge customers for just an HD package.

Worse case, I expect once the analog channels are eliminated, we'll see a lot more HD from Comcast.

'Better Living Through Modern, Expensive, Electronic Devices'

Ken H is offline  
post #548 of 12047 Old 11-20-2005, 02:51 PM
QZ1
AVS Special Member
 
QZ1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: S.E. PA
Posts: 5,047
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
In effect, there is an HD tier, it is called Digital Classic, which has channels I would otherwise not watch.

I actually opted for Digital Plus, because I like a few of those channels. But, if there were an HD tier, I would just get that instead.
QZ1 is offline  
post #549 of 12047 Old 11-20-2005, 05:25 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
maxman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Burlington County NJ
Posts: 3,391
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by raidbuck View Post

I think Comcast doesn't understand the HD mindset. It is to optimize availability, not price. Most of their other customer bases want to optimize price. So it is different. I'm sure that if they went into negotiations with a plan that included a $1 a month increase in DVR lease cost as an offset for higher HD channel aquisition costs they could, without unduly upsetting the HD-DVR community, bring these channels to us. (Pretty weird, isn't it, many of us calling for price increases!). Maybe I'm just being simplistic.

My guess is that they're protecting themselves from the point down the road where it's all HD.

ISF calibrated by Eliab - and lovin' it!

My DVD Profiler
maxman is offline  
post #550 of 12047 Old 11-26-2005, 07:15 PM
Advanced Member
 
vj9999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Bartlett, IL
Posts: 852
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I posted this in our local Chicago Comcast thread. I wouldn't read too much into it but who knows

"I was listening to the news on WLS (890 AM in Chicago) today and they mentioned that Comcast is raising prices by 4% in January. The reason is supposedly to offset the cost of some investments and addition of new HD programming."
vj9999 is offline  
post #551 of 12047 Old 11-26-2005, 07:57 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
maxman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Burlington County NJ
Posts: 3,391
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by vj9999 View Post

I posted this in our local Chicago Comcast thread. I wouldn't read too much into it but who knows

"I was listening to the news on WLS (890 AM in Chicago) today and they mentioned that Comcast is raising prices by 4% in January. The reason is supposedly to offset the cost of some investments and addition of new HD programming."

Comcast ALWAYS raises their price in January. It's as sure as death and taxes!

ISF calibrated by Eliab - and lovin' it!

My DVD Profiler
maxman is offline  
post #552 of 12047 Old 11-26-2005, 08:26 PM
Senior Member
 
McTNN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 328
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
An increase of 4% will be viewed by some in the industry as giving the customer a break.
McTNN is offline  
post #553 of 12047 Old 11-26-2005, 10:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
nightowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sacramento, CA US
Posts: 1,199
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
It's about 6 percent here in Sacramento, and there have been exactly NO HDTV channel additions in at least a year. CBS was added around a year ago, but that was it. Not even the usual "See, we are worth the price increase, here's a new channel to show you." Seems like that was ESPN or Discovery 2 years ago, and nothing last year, and appears nothing this year.
nightowl is offline  
post #554 of 12047 Old 11-26-2005, 11:30 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Keenan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 28,193
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 297 Post(s)
Liked: 376
7% in San Francisco and nothing has been added in over a year. 7% is a hell of an increase.
Keenan is online now  
post #555 of 12047 Old 11-27-2005, 09:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kevin j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Evanston IL
Posts: 2,874
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Comcast better add more HD channels next year or this rate increase will be seen as a money grab not a necassary thing imho.

If a movie or concert video or a TV show isn't on blu ray it darn well should be.

kevin j is online now  
post #556 of 12047 Old 11-27-2005, 10:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
nightowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sacramento, CA US
Posts: 1,199
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin j View Post

Comcast better add more HD channels next year or this rate increase will be seen as a money grab not a necassary thing imho.

They did add LimeTV, Logo, Sprout, and a few other channels. Oh, that's right, Comcast own's a stake in them, so of course they are adding those to the lineups. No room for any more HD channels, but plenty of room to add wasted SD channels.
nightowl is offline  
post #557 of 12047 Old 11-27-2005, 11:49 AM
Senior Member
 
jl1718's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Goodlettsville, TN
Posts: 261
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I know they cant add every channel te day it comes out. But, this is getting old. Come on comcast get us some more HD please.

Jerry
jl1718 is offline  
post #558 of 12047 Old 11-27-2005, 02:55 PM
Advanced Member
 
nhey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Highland Park, NJ
Posts: 703
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Comcast will be in big trouble once Verizon's FIOS get rolling. I'm getting the internet service installed this week - 15 mbps downloads and 2 mpbs uploads for $29.99 per month for the first year. This will not be affected by other's using the service on my street. Currently, Comcast gives me 6 mbps downloads and 0.6 mbps uploads IF no one else on the street is using the service (i.e., I never get 6/0.6), at about $45 per month. I will switch to Verizon's TV service next year - competitive pricing and almost unlimited bandwidth and a stated desire to offer as many HD channels as they can - and I believe they will deliver.
nhey is offline  
post #559 of 12047 Old 11-27-2005, 03:08 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Keenan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 28,193
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 297 Post(s)
Liked: 376
Quote:
Originally Posted by nhey View Post

Comcast will be in big trouble once Verizon's FIOS get rolling.

Comcast has nothing to worry about from FIOS for many, many years down the road. Less than 5% of the nation is close to having FIOS. It will probably be close to 10 yrs before FIOS has the penetration cable already has.
Keenan is online now  
post #560 of 12047 Old 11-27-2005, 03:46 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
fredfa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: San Antonio TX 78251
Posts: 49,069
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
nhey and keenan: Here is an in-depth article from today's New York Times looking at the whole telco-cable (and satellite) battle.

Calling Out the Cable Guy

By Lorne Manley and Ken Belson The New York Times November 27, 2005

Terry Denson and Dan York are not exactly boldface names in entertainment industry circles, but perhaps they should be. After all, nearly $30 billion and the future of two Baby Bells hang in part on whether these two refugees from the television programming world find success in their new jobs.

Mr. Denson, who works for Verizon Communications, and Mr. York, his counterpart at AT&T, are playing starring roles in their companies' risky forays into the TV business. In the latest twist in an accelerating technological free-for-all, the Baby Bells are trying to shore up their flagging fortunes by muscling their way into what was until just a decade ago the bailiwick of cable companies. Rarely competitors in the past, cable operators and telephone companies are now scrambling to be the one-stop shop that will gladly accept your monthly payments to watch television, use the phone and have high-speed Internet access.

Executives at both Verizon and AT&T, which last week officially changed its name from SBC, hope that the extensive selection of channels, whiz-bang features and low pricing of their video offerings will sway television viewers around the country to switch. Although cable and satellite have spent billions upgrading their delivery systems to accommodate a future in which all forms of entertainment are digital and perhaps interactive, the Baby Bells contend that bandwidth is destiny.

When they're done spending their billions, the phone companies say, they will surpass their rivals. They promise a seemingly infinite number of channels, many in crisp high definition, and plenty of interactive tie-ins, like the ability to check e-mail messages or screen incoming telephone calls on the TV set.

But as the Baby Bells know better than most, talk is cheap and the challenge is daunting. The capital expenditures are staggering. Holding little leverage with the content creators, they also end up paying more for programming than cable companies and satellite operators, who already hold the accounts of 92 million consumers and are rapidly making inroads into the telephone companies' own business of phone service.

What's more, the Baby Bells aren't expected to reach consumers in meaningful numbers anytime soon. Verizon began its Fios service in its first town, Keller, Tex., only two months ago, and AT&T will not roll out a service until later this year or next year. That means that the cable operators will have had years to solidify their relationships with customers for all their television and telecommunications needs.

"It's awfully difficult to see how a late entrant operating at a dramatic cost disadvantage and employing a strategy of charging less for more has any shot at earning acceptable returns," said Craig E. Moffett, a cable and satellite analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Company.

The phone companies, of course, cannot be discounted. The newly combined AT&T, with $90 billion in revenue, and Verizon, with $71 billion, dwarf the biggest cable operator, Comcast, with $20 billion. The phone giants have about 50 million local phone lines each and their service representatives communicate with many customers each day, offering prime opportunities to sweet-talk them into buying their television services.

The Baby Bells are not strangers to television, either, but that history is one that they would just as soon forget. During the mid-1990's, when the cable companies had the playing field to themselves, telephone companies formed two groups that tried - and failed - to establish TV programming services. Bell Atlantic, Nynex and Pacific Telesis, whose names have mostly been lost to the industry's mania for mergers, worked on Tele-TV, but that consortium's reliance on wireless technology proved its undoing. The other group, called Americast and made up of Ameritech, BellSouth and SBC, never got off the ground.

But the Baby Bells could be forgiven for acting distracted. The landmark Telecommunications Act of 1996, which deregulated the industry and allowed the Baby Bells to jump into the long-distance phone market, offered what seemed like a far cheaper and potentially more lucrative alternative to taking on the cable industry.

Things haven't worked out so swimmingly, however. Nearly 10 years later, the core business of the Baby Bells - renting phone lines - is under attack as never before, shrinking by an average of 4 percent each year over the last three years. Nearly 13 million people are forgoing land lines, relying entirely on cellphones instead, according to CTIA, a wireless-industry trade group. While the erosion has been minimized by the ownership stakes that Verizon, AT&T and BellSouth have in Verizon Wireless and Cingular, the cable companies and small independent concerns like Vonage and SunRocket are picking off thousands of customers a day with their Internet-based phone lines.

In just two years, the cable industry alone has persuaded about two million households or businesses to forsake the phone company. Cablevision has signed up more than 600,000 customers. Time Warner Cable is nearing one million accounts. And Comcast, the country's largest cable operator, with 21.5 million customers, has finally turned its marketing machine on the phone business, meaning that the pace of defections is likely to quicken.

The Baby Bells "see their land-line business as an ice cube melting in the sun right now, so they need to become a purveyor of content," said Todd Dagres, a partner at Spark Capital, a venture firm focused on media and technology.

The formidable task of acquiring that content and taking on the cable operators and satellite companies has fallen to Mr. Denson and Mr. York. The two men share more than a job description. Mr. Denson, 39, and Mr. York, 42, have both worked in midlevel positions on two sides of the television business equation - for the programmers and the cable companies.

Mr. Denson, vice president for video programming and content marketing and strategy at Verizon, toiled at ABC and MTV Networks before moving to Insight Communications, the country's ninth-largest cable operator. Mr. York, executive vice president for programming at AT&T, spent 13 years at HBO and then switched to In Demand, a venture of three cable companies that carries pay-per-view movies and subscription sports packages. They both took their new gigs for similar reasons, attracted by the opportunity to create something new on a large, blank canvas.

And both came into the negotiating process with the upper hand firmly held by the folks across the bargaining table. Content providers like the Walt Disney Company, Viacom and Time Warner charge a per-subscriber fee for their cable networks and demand carriage of some of their smaller cable channels in return for the right to carry the broadcast networks. Few television viewers will scurry to sign up with Verizon or AT&T because they prefer those companies' network architecture.

The prime responsibility of Mr. Denson and Mr. York - buying content at a reasonable price - will be a determining factor, at least until newfangled features like the ability to choose multiple camera angles for a sporting event or to view digital photos become reality.

Facing entrenched competitors, the telephone companies can ill afford not to match or surpass what cable and satellite offer. That imperative has led many analysts covering this converging world to estimate that the content providers will be able to wrest a hefty premium - as much as 25 percent - from Verizon and AT&T, meaning that profitability for the Baby Bells' television services may be years, perhaps decades, away.

Mr. Denson and Mr. York cautioned against accepting too readily the conventional wisdom. "Obviously, we're not negotiating Comcast rates," Mr. Denson said. But those estimates, he said, were off the mark.

Besides, they say, Verizon and AT&T are not entirely lacking in the clout department themselves. "We're not a mom-and-pop start-up cable system," Mr. York said. "We are one of the largest communications companies in the world and partners with some of the content providers already."

Indeed, Verizon and AT&T control the two biggest cellphone companies in the country in Verizon Wireless and Cingular, and content providers searching for new outlets are frantically striking deals with wireless companies to carry their programming. And the two phone giants just happen to be among the biggest advertisers on the media conglomerates' cavalcade of broadcast and cable networks. Annoy them too much, and they could take a chunk of their advertising elsewhere. Companies like Disney, Viacom and NBC Universal, a unit of General Electric and Vivendi Universal, know better - most of the time - than to push too hard and jeopardize a gushing revenue source.

"Don't assume they're paying a big premium," said Sean R. H. Bratches, executive vice president for sales and marketing at ESPN and ABC Sports, both of which are divisions of Disney. Mr. Bratches was the lead negotiator for the parent company's recent deal with Verizon.

Another motive keeps Disney, Viacom and other content providers from exacting too many pounds of flesh. "We are enamored of the fact there will be more gatekeepers in the marketplace," Mr. Bratches said. The more fragmented the industry offering television service, content providers say, the harder it will be for the biggest players, like Comcast, to push back against the annual increases in programming fees that content companies desire and demand.

But the programmers are certainly reaping benefits. For example, all of the cable channels of Disney and Viacom - including relative newcomers like ESPNU, an all-college sports network, and MTV Desi, a music-video-centric channel for South-Asian Americans - reside on Verizon's extended basic tier rather than on a more limited, more expensive digital tier. Disney and Viacom do not have similar deals with any cable operator or satellite provider.

The benefits for the content companies are substantial. They are paid a per-subscriber fee for a lot more people. And getting their newer channels in front of more viewers often translates into higher ratings and more advertising revenue.

Verison will even be a partner on promotions, as it was recently for ESPNU in Keller, Tex.: during a Friday night football game, the company was a co-sponsor of a halftime kicking contest, complete with Randy White, the former Dallas Cowboys star. Disney has also created a whole new revenue stream by persuading Verizon to pay a fee for each of its 4.8 million high-speed Internet subscribers to receive Disney's selection of proprietary broadband Web sites, including ESPN 360.

While Verizon lacks the leverage of cable and satellite companies with their millions of subscribers, it hopes to wow consumers with extra channels and diverse programming. Cable operators have regularly struggled with the capacity constraints of their systems, forced to limit the number of channels so they can deliver innovations like video-on-demand and high-definition channels. "We don't have to make that trade-off or compromise," said Mr. Denson, because Verizon's network is more advanced.

That explains why Verizon and AT&T have agreed to carry on their extended basic tiers truly niche networks like the Soundtrack Channel, a four-year-old offering devoted to - yes - movie soundtracks, with a healthy dollop of entertainment news and features. "Because they are new to the marketplace themselves, their appetite for channels like ours - that will help differentiate their offerings - is far greater," said William Lee, the channel's chief executive.

But just how much prospective customers care about receiving hordes of niche channels - like the Gospel Music Channel and Blackbelt TV - remains unclear.

"There's also too much of a good thing," said Joseph Laszlo, an analyst at Jupiter Research. "If Verizon added the Lint and Dust Channel, they would just end up with a program guide that is difficult to navigate."

The Baby Bells are under no illusions that smaller channels will persuade people to jettison their current providers. "Are we going to get two, three, four percentage points because we have the Black Family Channel?" said Mr. Denson, referring to gains in market share. "No, we're not."

But they will do everything they can to reinforce a message of serving the customer's needs in all aspects, including service, something that the cable industry has struggled with for decades.

In Keller, Tex., about 30 minutes north of Fort Worth, Verizon is doing just that. With its new fiber lines, Verizon can sell multiple phone lines and broadband connections that are six or more times as fast as the cable company's. Verizon's lowest-priced television service charges $39.95 a month for 180 channels. The most similar offering from Charter Communications, the local cable company, provides 260 channels for $52.99.

"The first thing that got me was price. When you're a dad, that's what it's all about," said Tony Rodges, a Keller resident who switched to Verizon's Fios service from Charter. "But then the little things kick in, like the picture, the sound, the channels."

MR. Rodges also marveled at the eagerness of the Verizon technician. "The guy jumped through hoops" for the installation, he said. "I didn't feel he was going to leave me hanging like the cable guys."

Verizon's decision to run fiber-optic cable all the way to customers' homes is a calculated - and expensive - risk, and a counterpoint to AT&T's television strategy. Verizon will spend an estimated $22 billion through 2010 burying high-capacity cables, according to Sanford C. Bernstein research. But that substantial investment gives Verizon the flexibility to add data-hungry high-definition programs, faster broadband speeds and other features that customers like Mr. Rodges are already enjoying. Though costly, these fiber connections are seen by Verizon as the only way to reliably leapfrog the competition. By the end of 2006, the company expects to make these fiber-based services available to six million homes in its territory, including Fairfax, Va., and Huntington Beach, Calif.

By contrast, AT&T is installing fiber cables only to within 3,000 feet of homes and using compression technology to make sure that television, phone and broadband signals can travel the rest of the way over older and narrower wire already in the ground. That will save billions of dollars in construction costs and help AT&T start selling television faster. Sanford C. Bernstein estimates that AT&T will spend more than $7 billion through 2010; the company has said that it will spend about $4 billion through 2008.

But there are hiccups. The software that Microsoft is installing for AT&T has rarely been deployed on such a large scale. And while AT&T says that it will start selling television this year or early in 2006, only one market - the company's home base in San Antonio - is expected to get the service initially. AT&T hopes to make its television service available to 18 million homes by the first half of 2008.

As the Bells rumble into action, cable companies are aggressively selling discounted bundles of television, broadband and phone services. They are also offering many of the services that the Bells expect to provide. Comcast, for instance, now gives away nearly 3,800 hours of on-demand movies and programs to some subscribers. Time Warner Cable and others offer a raft of free interactive features like video games and home shopping and are leasing powerful digital video recorders.

That will not only generate more revenue but will also make it harder for Verizon and AT&T to lure away cable customers. According to Jonathan Schildkraut, an industry analyst at Jefferies & Company, customers who buy at least two products from one company are half as likely to switch carriers than if they had just one.

Mr. Rodges, for example, is already hooked on Verizon's bundle of services, and he is unlikely to switch back. But he is one of the few who have the option of buying television from a Baby Bell.

Brian L. Roberts, the chairman of Comcast, is careful not to count out the phone companies, with their millions of customers, billions of dollars in cash and long history of fighting back. He also knows that the cable industry unwisely laughed off satellite companies when they entered the television market a decade ago. Now, he must wrestle with the likes of DirecTV, which is part of Rupert Murdoch's media empire.

Even so, Mr. Roberts figures that the Bells have too many hurdles - financial, technical and cultural - to make a serious dent in his business. "I don't understand their economic model; I don't understand how that pays off," he told investors recently. "It didn't work when Bell Atlantic did it. It didn't work when Tele-TV did it. And it didn't get cheaper to do in 2005 and 2006."

How the Baby Bells will fare may be subject to debate, but one outcome can be reliably predicted, said Nicole Browning, president of affiliate sales and marketing for MTV Networks and BET. "It means more choice and more recourse," she said, "when you're not satisfied with what you're getting."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/27/bu...gewanted=print
fredfa is offline  
post #561 of 12047 Old 11-27-2005, 04:07 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
maxman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Burlington County NJ
Posts: 3,391
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin j View Post

Comcast better add more HD channels next year or this rate increase will be seen as a money grab not a necassary thing imho.

And your point is? They've been "grabbing" more money each January ever since day 1.

ISF calibrated by Eliab - and lovin' it!

My DVD Profiler
maxman is offline  
post #562 of 12047 Old 11-27-2005, 04:21 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Keenan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 28,193
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 297 Post(s)
Liked: 376
Good article on FIOS. Essentially by sometime in 2006 there will be maybe 3 communities up and running. As much as I would like to see Comcast face some competition from somewhere other than satellite, FIOS is just not going to be a factor for quite a few(5-10) years.
Keenan is online now  
post #563 of 12047 Old 11-27-2005, 04:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kevin j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Evanston IL
Posts: 2,874
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
My point is we need more value for the more $$$ we'll soon be paying.

If a movie or concert video or a TV show isn't on blu ray it darn well should be.

kevin j is online now  
post #564 of 12047 Old 11-27-2005, 05:12 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
maxman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Burlington County NJ
Posts: 3,391
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin j View Post

My point is we need more value for the more $$$ we'll soon be paying.

What we need, would like to have, and get are entirely different things. As I said, they increase their rates every January, no matter what.

ISF calibrated by Eliab - and lovin' it!

My DVD Profiler
maxman is offline  
post #565 of 12047 Old 11-28-2005, 02:16 PM
QZ1
AVS Special Member
 
QZ1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: S.E. PA
Posts: 5,047
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxman View Post

Comcast ALWAYS raises their price in January. It's as sure as death and taxes!

Not here they don't....they raise them in April.
QZ1 is offline  
post #566 of 12047 Old 11-28-2005, 05:37 PM
Member
 
DeltaBill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 45
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Good Article.

I can remember where, but recently I read an article about FIOS and the author was advocating that local governments should take over and run a bundle of 2 to 4 trunk fiber lines and remove all cooper and cable. Each trunk would then be leased to various companies giving the consumer multiple choices. The article did acknowledge that this is a far fetched idea, but indicated that the economics might not be that inconceivable for long term usage. However, one of the ideas within the article called for the elimination of Satellite dishes, instead giving the satellite companies the option to lease one of the trunks.

On a side note, the article also talked about a Cell Phone and Landline bundle where each person would get a cell phone number and each house would get a Landline over the FIOS. When someone called the cell number, the system would search for a cell phone on the network, and if none existed, would ring the landline instead. With each person having a different number the landline would ring a different tone for each cell number.
DeltaBill is offline  
post #567 of 12047 Old 11-28-2005, 07:09 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
maxman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Burlington County NJ
Posts: 3,391
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by QZ1 View Post

Not here they don't....they raise them in April.

Consider yourself lucky --- you get an extra 3 months at the old price!

ISF calibrated by Eliab - and lovin' it!

My DVD Profiler
maxman is offline  
post #568 of 12047 Old 11-28-2005, 08:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
WiFi-Spy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,286
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by nhey View Post

Comcast will be in big trouble once Verizon's FIOS get rolling. I'm getting the internet service installed this week - 15 mbps downloads and 2 mpbs uploads for $29.99 per month for the first year. This will not be affected by other's using the service on my street. Currently, Comcast gives me 6 mbps downloads and 0.6 mbps uploads IF no one else on the street is using the service (i.e., I never get 6/0.6), at about $45 per month. I will switch to Verizon's TV service next year - competitive pricing and almost unlimited bandwidth and a stated desire to offer as many HD channels as they can - and I believe they will deliver.

try actually using your 15Mbs download speed, see how fast you get disconnected for bandwidth abuse...

Tyler Pruitt - Pro Calibrator - BionicAV
Technical Support - SpectraCal

THX Certified - Video Calibration

WiFi-Spy is offline  
post #569 of 12047 Old 11-29-2005, 06:14 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
trbarry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Gainesville FL USA
Posts: 10,138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


try actually using your 15Mbs download speed, see how fast you get disconnected for bandwidth abuse...

Is this actually known to happen on Verizon FIOS? On Comcast I can keep a sustained rate of close to 6 mbps for hours at a time with no obvious problems.

- Tom

Why don't we power our electric cars from greener, cheaper Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors?

Tom Barry - Find my video filters at www.trbarry.com
trbarry is offline  
post #570 of 12047 Old 11-29-2005, 05:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kevin j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Evanston IL
Posts: 2,874
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Any word on how the negotiations are going with Espn2HD/UHD?

If a movie or concert video or a TV show isn't on blu ray it darn well should be.

kevin j is online now  
Reply HDTV Programming

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off