AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
290 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This was posted at a SatGuys thread :

VOOM Cries Foul Over INHD and INHD2


Byline: MICHAEL BASCOMBE


Rainbow's DBS provider VOOM wants its INHD, and it doesn't think In Demand is playing fair. So, it's taken its case to the FCC, filing a program access complaint Fri against In Demand, whose shareholders include Comcast, Cox and Time Warner Cable. The complaint, first reported by Satellite Business News, claims In Demand has refused to negotiate a "commercially reasonable agreement" with VOOM for the carriage of INHD and INHD2. "We are confident that our pricing policies are consistent with the FCC and all other rules," In Demand said in a statement Mon. "The allegations contained in Rainbow's complaint are completely without merit. We will defend the complaint vigorously at the FCC and have every confidence that the FCC will find our policies consistent with all FCC rules and regulations." VOOM claims that in Sept '03 In Demand offered a fee based upon a minimum number of subs that would have worked out to $3.84/sub based upon the DBS provider's current subscription numbers. At a Sept '04 meeting, In Demand informed VOOM that it had ignored the company's counterproposal because it did not contain minimum subscriber guarantees, the complaint said. "ID made plain that its offer was on a 'take it or leave it' basis," VOOM told the FCC. VOOM doesn't believe In Demand has made minimum sub guarantees of any other operator. Worth noting that during these initial negotiations, VOOM projected its sub count would be at 300K by year-end. As of 2Q '04, it had netted 25K. Dark Side: We couldn't help but remember back to a Media Institute lunch a few years back that Rainbow DBS head Chuck Dolan spoke at, where he declared program access rules were bad for cable. "At Cablevision we spend tens, if not hundreds, of millions developing original programming for our customers. Yet, under current regulations we are forced to share much of that programming directly with our competitors."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,633 Posts
Very interesting, in part because Cablevision does have INHD (but not INHD2) in its lineup. Does the Cablevsion contract have a minimum subscriber number?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,392 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by SonomaSearcher
Very interesting, in part because Cablevision does have INHD (but not INHD2) in its lineup. Does the Cablevsion contract have a minimum subscriber number?
I don't know the answer but a more general question would be whether or not inHD requires minimum subs from other smaller cable companies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,548 Posts
Makes sense.


I'm just glad to see that they are trying to get InHD.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
290 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Quote:
Originally posted by Vaggeto
Makes sense.


I'm just glad to see that they are trying to get InHD.
Man, you're right. The FCC filing proves that VOOM is serious about getting inHD. If they win, it would be a win for all Sat providers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by CycloneGT
I smell an Ergen somewhere nearby.
Interesting could be also that Voom 20 own Channels will be available to D* or E*.


Honestly I think that will happen when Voom goes out of the HD distribution business, after D* deployment of their Sats next year and then Rainbow sell this Chs to the competition
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,548 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by CycloneGT
Any why would they care about winning INHD if their goose is about cooked and they likley will be turning into a content provider?
Could there be any better way to put a torch to a thread? I would expect better from someone with so many posts.


To answer your question... hopefully this means your assumptions are wrong about them, and that they are not just planning to be a content provider.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,557 Posts
Hey, I might be of the opinion that the 25k subscribers can't keep the level of expense afloat long enough to survive. You might be one of the Voom faithful who see this 25k as a gross underestimation which doesn't matter anyway since Voom's best days are ahead of them.


I'm not looking to start flames. If Voom can't keep the DBS business running, then they can shed a lot of the expenses by selling off the subcribers and satellite capital. They then take their "Voom Exclusives" and any "rights" that they have purchased and sell them to Cable companies and remaining DBS companies. Just like their sister companies does with AMC, WE, and so on. That way at least they get money for the Satellite and the Slot and a little more for the existing subscribers. They also end up with something that is generating revenue.


All that said, I wish that Voom does pull it off. I just don't think that they had enough of a chance with only 13 TPs at 61.5. Most DBS customers want LIL and they balk at the idea of OTA limitations. With D* & E* most likely carrying the locals as well as the 100s of other channels that Voom didn't have, it was just too much to over come. Not to mention Voom banners in Sears around a TV screen showing Dish Network's HDTV demo channel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32,172 Posts
There is certainly a reasonable business case for a content provider to require a minimum number of subs to get the best rate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,548 Posts
Well... I would say there definently is if there wasn't a regulation that requires them to all have the same offer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,392 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by rogo
There is certainly a reasonable business case for a content provider to require a minimum number of subs to get the best rate.
But what VOOM is claiming is that such requirement doesn't exist in the contract with the current cable companies that carry inHD. They must know for sure of one of such contracts: Cablevision ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
538 Posts
A couple of things here:


1. I think it is great that Voom continues to try to grow its HD offerings with what is apparently a copuple of popular HD channels. Before non-voomers bash Vooms situation, where is D* & E* in this? Why aren't they chasing INHD- even joining Voom in making the case to make it available to their subs. (of course, they could be after it in the background, but carrying the INHDs seems like it could be an overall DBS provider objective (not just a Voom goal). If Voom could win, then D* & E* subs could also win because their much greater number of subscriber and much greater bandwith capacity than little Voom should facilitate INHD carriage on them as well.


2. I wonder if Voom would go after the HDNets too. Apparently Cuban has some issue with HDNets on Voom (or Voom has not tried to get HDNets) but if they are willing to fight it out on the legal front to carry INHDs, it seems that it would make as much sense to go after the HDNets too.


Voom-lovers and Voom-bashers shouldn't be in too much conflict on this issue. Here's a DBS company trying to make more HD available to anyone who wants it. I applaud the little guy for trying and hope they succeed. This seems like it should be the kind of thing that the much bigger players are doing.


If they succeed, what keeps D* & E* & Cable from attacking Voom's exclusive offering channels lack of availability to other carriers?


I think the best part is that someone is trying to bring more currently available HD channels to a nationwide audience. For someone who the bashers keep warning are going to die "soon", this kind of activity makes me wonder about the specific definition of when "soon" is going to arrive. If it is the same "soon" touted as when D* is going to add a number of additional HD channels to its HD package, it seems there could be quite a bit of time. Either way, I think any company working to make more HD available to a nation-wide audience is a good thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
786 Posts
I'm glad Voom is doing this and on the DirecTV note I've said that InHD was coming many times on DirecTV and its just never got there yet and I haven't been told why so I called my contact and told him about Voom and the FCC and he quickly told me DirecTV has been trying to get this channel and has been getting ready to file a complaint with the FCC as well so it seems to me that if DirecTV steps in over InHD it will help all of us. DirecTV should have the required minimum subscriber levels wouldn't you think.


But from what I've been told is that InHD has been hard balling in every direction and its not upto the FCC to handle this for us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
This can only be considered good news. If it aids the idea of open and fair access to content, it stands to benefit everyone. I would have hooked up with Voom if I could handle the capital outlay for it. I just can't swing that in my current life situation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,655 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by HobeSoundDarryl



If they succeed, what keeps D* & E* & Cable from attacking Voom's exclusive offering channels lack of availability to other carriers?
I think thats a different scenario. Voom isnt selling its content to any providers. HDNET and INHD are and maybe treating some unfairly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
I'm a current VOOM sub and I think that this has to deal with cable vs sat. INHD - 1 and 2 are owned by cable companies.....who don't want the ch on ANY sat provider. The owners of INHD have wrongfully raised the carriage price for their ch when sat providers have approached them. Which I think is against the law. Thats VOOMs basis on bringing this to court. I hope they win. As far as VOOM surviving ...I hope they do , but they really need way more subs. Well, Alot more subs. They need 2 million subs....and they need to show growth. I feel that Dish will buy out VOOM to compete with Directv's increase in HD. Dish simply needs the SAts...and at 61.5 its a no brainer. I love VOOM ...I think its a great bargain. I just have no confidence on it surviving with the subs that it has now. I hope Im wrong. Not to mention the fact that in JAn all of the grandfathered rates from the early subs are going to go up in price. If VOOM doesn't have a DVR or an increase in HD programming via INHD or HDNET....they are surely done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,956 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by vurbano
I think thats a different scenario. Voom isnt selling its content to any providers. HDNET and INHD are and maybe treating some unfairly.
Not sure about the legalities of this, but the HDNet and the INHD situations seem different to me in that INHD is owned by cable companies who also carry it, as opposed to HDNet which is not owned by a cable/satellite provider. I think that the cable companies have to make INHD available to satellite because of this, while HdNet can be made available (or not) as its owner deems fit.
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top