VOOM DBS News

[bradley]

With what appears as the demise VOOM, we all maybe seeking alternative means. And, even though we presently see conflicting indicators from Cablevision's Board and VOOM DBS, at this particular moment, it does not mean the absolute end nor does it confirm VOOM's DBS continued viability.

We must be prepared to make informed decisions no matter what the outcome and therefore will be better suited for the challenge if we are informed to make qualified decisions.

The question, should you leave VOOM DBS at this juncture is one that is a personal judgment call, and only you can determine at this point. But, I will say, at this moment in time, you've little to gain by departing. Let's examine the reasons why…

VOOM is, without a doubt, in a very precarious position, but still operating as of today, Sunday, February 6, 2005. They are still advertising, signing up new subscribers - obligating them to six month contracts, AND continuing to insist they are going to stay the course with expanded channel line-ups to include 70 HD and hundreds of SD channels. We are also seeing software upgrades evident with the latest SWv 7.34.

To verify the claim Ucentric has been instructed to continue with the DVR software project I have personally contacted them and await a reply from the individual who heads-up their development team (Ucentric, recently acquired by Motorola, is the contract developer of software for the forthcoming VOOM DBS DVR).

Back to the proposed sale, the FCC and regulatory approval process will require months of analysis prior to the approved transfer of assets. I have also contacted the FCC and await answers to two questions I posed, 1.) how long will the review process take, 2.) is VOOM DBS required to continue operations during the review process? I am concerned Cablevision board members may decide not continue to finance the day-to-day operations of VOOM until the authorization for transfer is either approved or denied.

Both DirecTV and DishNetwork are increasing fees and I attribute this to the lack of viable competition in the market place. Comparatively, if you look at the fee structure of Voom and then actual start-up costs and monthly fees, if you were to bring your business to the competition, what would be your real out-of-pocket expenses?

Both DBS providers, DirecTV and DishNetwork, announced full intention of implementation of MPEG4 this year (2005). This will result in a bandwidth savings of up to 3:1 when utilized in HD processing; a significant savings to the operator. But, it comes at a cost to the market and consumers.

We currently use a CODEX of MPEG2. In order for both DirecTV and DishNetwork to facilitate the change over of MPEG2 to MPEG4 it requires a hardware change. MPEG4 cannot be simply introduced with a software update. The processors within the STBs are unable to process MPEG4 signals. We, who utilize VOOM DBS STBs, also utilized MPEG2 when we view our programming. If VOOM DBS were to implement MPEG4 for our viewing pleasure we would simply requite, in our existing box, a small card to facilitate the processing. VOOM, in that aspect, was forward looking.

DirecTV will begin to utilize MPEG4 Q2'05 and subsequent target for DishNetwork is Q4 of this year, 2005. The current HD DVR DirecTV is selling is only MPEG2 compliant. It is not upgradeable to MPEG4 ability. So, if you were to take you business to them, purchase the present HD STB or even their HD DVR your are still going to have to get, yet another STB or DVR, HD or SD, because they are not MPEG4 compliant. DirecTV is telling its informed clients to withhold from purchasing the present HD DVR, or any DVR for that matter because MPEG4 compliant STBs and DVRs are nowhere ready at this time.

Now, enter into the equation DishNetwork. They have, at present, their 811 HD STB and the 921 HD DVR. Both are only MPEG2 compliant. Any wonder why they are strongly pushing it? Their forthcoming 94x HD DVR, as confirmed by a DishNetwork support engineer, is also only MPEG2 compliant.

DirecTV is manufacturing and marketing their own DVR line ceasing their relationship with TiVo, as it stands today. TiVo will continue to be a viable option it's just DirecTV views the potential additional income from DVR fees too substantial to pass on. So, in the words of TiVo, you will not be able to acquire MPEG4 DirecTV TiVo compliant DVRs.

At this point, my question to both DirecTV and DishNetwork, why do you keep selling non-compliant equipment to an unsuspecting public, do not inform them of the forthcoming changes and possible additional expenses they may incur again? After speaking to a supervisor, I'll have to give it to DirecTV; they have stated they will take care of their customers although they don't know what form this will take; a complete swap-out or a discount on a new equipment purchase. Well, that certainly makes me feel warm and fuzzy all over. DishNetwork's position, on the other hand, they simply don't know.

Just as VOOM DBS is in a precarious situation the competition is really not much better right now. So, I'd say for the time being, we are all in a pretty good spot right now. And, don't worry. What eventually happens, happens. You and I might influence the situation by becoming proactive (see: post "VOOM DBS And The FCC": http://www.satelliteguys.us/showthread.php?t=46755), but don't get anxious about it. As with life, it all works out in the end.

 

[vurbano]

Yes but those D* HD subs who left D* for V* may want to rejoin D* now if they already have a D* HD reciever to have it upgraded for free when they roll out mpeg4 HDLIL in their area. IF those people wait until after a new mpeg4 HD reciever is for sale by D* they may get the shaft waiting for V* to decide whether or not it is going to live or not. Voom needs to tell its customers what its plans are, what is fact and what is wishful thinking. remaining silent and giving cryptic information like staying active during a transition period is irresponsible as a company and a disservice to loyal customers.

 

[Vicki]

Let's hear it for some voices of reason!!

Bradly and Vurbano -- AMEN!! To both of you! :clap

Vicki

 

[mdonnelly]

Good rehash of everything that's been on this board for the last 4 months.

 

[Vicki]

I didn't participate in the poll, since I'm not yet back on VOOM, but I am pretty sure that the OTA problems that caused me to leave previously can be solved eventually, and once I am back on VOOM, I expect to hang in until the bitter end...whenever that is.

I felt Bradley's post was an excellent recap of the current situation. I still don't understand as much as I'd like about how all this stuff works, but it sounded to me like it accurately summarized things to be considered and what is to be gained or lost by people/companies in different situations.

However, the two things Vurbano mentioned, that Bradley didn't point out, are very important considerations for some people.

Both of them related their information calmly and clearly, as opposed to some of the posts that discuss these things...and I salute them both for that! :up :up

Aside from not having VOOM right now, I guess should consider myself one of the lucky ones...I never bought anybody's equipment, my TV has a built-in tuner, and I have decided I can live without the SD cable channels and couple of mediocre HD channels that my cable company provides. So, if VOOM doesn't make it back, I'll just be OTA-ing it until something better comes along.

 

[SactoCal]

I voted to stay the course. But for me, you left out an option. I am almost convinced that if I must eventually find an alternative, it will be a C/ku band dish. I could never stand to watch Comcast cable HD, it sucketh the big vimpilator. And from what I have seen of E* and D*, well, I am Voom spoiled.

 

[jagouar]

Going to BEV/Starchoice... I will stay with voom until either company delivers a DVR then Im gone.

 

[ram1220]

Yes but those D* HD subs who left D* for V* may want to rejoin D* now if they already have a D* HD reciever to have it upgraded for free when they roll out mpeg4 HDLIL in their area. IF those people wait until after a new mpeg4 HD reciever is for sale by D* they may get the shaft waiting for V* to decide whether or not it is going to live or not. Voom needs to tell its customers what its plans are, what is fact and what is wishful thinking. remaining silent and giving cryptic information like staying active during a transition period is irresponsible as a company and a disservice to loyal customers.

Boo Hoo

 

[bryan27]

I'm with jagouar, I'll be sticking around till the end, if there is one and then goto BEV. 14 HD channels for about $9 US isn't bad at all. BTW BEV has a total of 19 HD channels and some HD PPV channels.

Speaking of the FCC we have past DBS proceedings on our side. In the D* & E* merger the FCC said they wouldn't grant a merger which would reduce the number of choices a houshold had. Remember in that proceeding the players were D*, E*, V*, SA, and cable. Although V* wasn't up yet it was counted since they were close to launch and would be a competitor.

All we have to do is scower the D* & E* merger proceeding for statements from the FCC and use it to show why the sale of Rainbow 1 and the Uplink center to E* would not be in the public's best interest.

 

[bradley]

Valid...

Yet, the subs involved constituted millions when looking at two viable operations merging as one. The argument that could be imposed against; VOOM's exceptionally poor growth, very low sub base. Would it be viewed as a viable entity?

But, then again, that could be countered with poor managerial oversight by Installs, Inc. with their inability to manage and monitor subcontractor activity effectively.

Alas, I would think overall responsibility would rest with executives at VOOM DBS.

It would be quite interesting to view billing for services rendered by Installs, Inc and review any documented QA issues.

 

[vurbano]

Boo Hoo

try to be more original. LMAO

 

[JimP]

Just some thoughts....

I believe that there is a fundamental difference between a consolidation of two satellite services and Voom selling a satellite to E* for financial reasons as this all relates to what the FCC's roll in all of this is. This is not a matter of reducing competition in order to make a stronger company, its a matter of shutting down a company and selling off its assets. Not the same thing. What exactly do you think the FCC is capable of doing? Tell Voom that they can't sell their satellite and they have to continue operating at a loss???

I've been a Voomer since Oct 2003 and would like to see it continue on, but I think we all know that's not going to happen. However, based on the information we've seen, what's there to speculate on? We'll be given an option to continue the service under Dish due to the position of the satellite and have Dish programming which will probably be enhanced due to the Rainbow 1's capability.

 

[tdillon]

My answer to the question "Has this article impacted your relationship with VOOM?" is No.

Will I be continuing Voom service until a better alternative comes along? Yes.

Since the poll doesn't contain my answer, I chose not to vote.

 

[bryan27]

Jim, it is more than a satellite. The sale involves 11 DBS frequencies. If those frequencies go to E* you can forget there ever being a 3rd DBS service as none of the western DBS slots can be seen from the Eastern US. The FCC has a long standing that there should be 3 DBS companies.

The FCC can tell VOOM that E* isn't a suitable byer for the frequencies and to sell to someone else.

 

[JimP]

bryan

I see what you're saying about the frequencies. But can the FCC prevent Voom from selling the satellite to Dish or any other willing buyer? Since they were probably given the authority to launch the satellite by the FCC, I can see a case where selling the satellite and/or frequencies to either D* or E* would both result in reduction in competition. However, even if Voom was to not sell the satellite to anyone and just shut down, there would be a reduction in competition. Selling its assets won't change that. Either way, you still would only have two satellite services.

Your thoughts?

 

[bradley]

Frequencies

The physical assets, as I see it, are, for the most part, essential to the primary function of VOOM DBS. Can VOOM DBS continue, viably with their existing facilities out of New York? Would this stifle VOOM's ability to expand and offer true options and competition in a 3 DBS market? Perhaps.

VOOM DBS, I would argue, needs all of its assets; orbital position, frequencies, hardware to truly exist. The commission may vote that the physical assets of VOOM DBS may indeed be sold off the highest bidder. I do believe the problem will rest on the laurels of the frequencies and perhaps the orbital position although I do hope the commission realizes it is the whole entity that will make for a much more successful and vibrant competitor.

 

[bryan27]

The FCC doesn't have much say on the purchase of equipment or property. For instance it is perfectly legal to own a transmitter (in this case a satellite) without a license to use it, one without a FCC license can also own a studio and production facility. The FCC does have the say who gets licenses. In addition to the 11 DBS frequencies we are also talking about the licenses to transmit from the SD uplink center.

It would be highly unlikely for VOOM (or any existing DBS provider) to just shutdown. It isn't that the FCC would say the VOOM frequecies could not be sold it has the authority to say who is a suitable purchaser. When looking at the FCC record for the last few years it can be argued that E* and D* are not suitable purchasers. Especially E* since it doesn't have a very good track record with FCC rule compliance. For every year that E* has existed it has been fined for violations.

The milestones for DBS providers which include building and launching a satellite can be waved. The FCC waved Dominion's building and launch milestone, as was USSB's milestone waved. In both cases the FCC stated that using someone elses satellite to transmit on your frequencies is the same as the building and launch milestone.

I do agree with bradley that VOOM needs all it's assets to truely exist, but it is possible to exist without a satellite. Only more time will tell what will happen as it is still very early.

 

[Dan Berndt]

We discussed in great detail whether VOOM or any satellite service provider could operate without actually owning a satellite in the "Who Owns the VOOM Contract" thread, http://www.satelliteguys.us/showthread.php?t=46469. There appears to be no technical reason why VOOM could not continue to operate after the sale of Rainbow I. And, as identified in some of the other threads, VOOM could still offer a product with our existing receivers that is superior to what any of the other service providers can offer.

The CSRs keep telling us that VOOM is going ahead with their planned improvements and we have technical theories on how these improvements can be done without Rainbow I. VOOM is continuing to take installation orders, upgrade software and advertise. There is a significant possibility that we are not even close the end of VOOM.

 

[tnsprin]

We discussed in great detail whether VOOM or any satellite service provider could operate without actually owning a satellite in the "Who Owns the VOOM Contract" thread, http://www.satelliteguys.us/showthread.php?t=46469. There appears to be no technical reason why VOOM could not continue to operate after the sale of Rainbow I. And, as identified in some of the other threads, VOOM could still offer a product with our existing receivers that is superior to what any of the other service providers can offer.

The CSRs keep telling us that VOOM is going ahead with their planned improvements and we have technical theories on how these improvements can be done without Rainbow I. VOOM is continuing to take installation orders, upgrade software and advertise. There is a significant possibility that we are not even close the end of VOOM.

The board of Cablevision is not planning to support Voom. So where do you see this support coming from?

 

[jame_g]

I voted that I would keep Voom for the foreseeable future. However it was nothing in the "article" that caused me to vote this way. The "article" was mainly a re-post of what many of us already knew from this forum and our own research. The results of this poll are similar to the results of an earlier poll that asked almost the same question.