Two down, one to go

[rpm]

Two down, one to go

This week saw the fall of Telkom Media, which had been the market's favourite to break MultiChoice's pay television monopoly. Telkom Media's demise comes a year after e.sat threw in the towel and instead launched its 24-hour news channel on MultiChoice's DStv platform.

 

[ic]

The folding of e.sat and Telkom Media raises the question as to whether the Independent Communications Authority of SA (Icasa) should be blamed.

It was warned to issue only one additional licence because the market was too small for more than two operators.

I strongly disagree with this line of questioning: in a capitalist system, it should never be left to a market regulator to decide how much competition should exist in that market - the market itself should determine how many competitors it can support, which means that the strongest survive and the weakest either get gobbled up by the strong or go bankrupt or are liquidated.

 

[ToxicBunny]

This is not good enough..

ICASA should be blamed for issuing licenses to people who didn't even attempt to launch a service.... and the licensees who have got a license but aren't using it (and I'm pointing my finger at esat) should be fined...

 

[iiith]

Bad news for consumers who will keep on paying exuberant charges of M/choice, , with further price hike from next month.

 

[Submolecule]

I'm not so sure why multi choice is always seen as the bad guy (monopoly) they are always showing the best shows/movies/mini-series and not to mention the largest broadcaster of the sport in Africa. They were also the first to introduce HD, I happily pay my monthly fee knowing that the quality of the programming is of the highest quality.

I would hate to think what SA television would be like without them.

 

[ToxicBunny]

HugeFan : Lets put them into perspective WORLDWIDE....

They're at least 5 years behind on the Widescreen curve.
Most other satelite broadcasters have MULTIPLE HD channels.. not one half hearted BS attempt that repeats things 3 times a day.

The cost of Dstv is not out of line with world-wide norms.. the quality of their content and the way that content is treated is seriously below par.

 

[ic]

I'm not so sure why multi choice is always seen as the bad guy (monopoly) they are always showing the best shows/movies/mini-series and not to mention the largest broadcaster of the sport in Africa. They were also the first to introduce HD, I happily pay my monthly fee knowing that the quality of the programming is of the highest quality.

I would hate to think what SA television would be like without them.

The fact is that MonoChoice is a de facto monopoly where PayTV in South Africa is concerned.

Another fact is that the vast majority of South Africans [such as yourself] have no idea how low quality MonoChoice's programming and delivery thereof really is - simply bcos there is no local PayTV competition against which one can measure MonoChoice and its utter crap that it forces down the throats of every paying customer.

Many South Africans have been exposed to international television, and do have a healthy perspective on what we should have in South Africa considering the price we pay MonoChoice.

I am personally tired of monopolies and the communists that support the notion of 'there can be only one'.

 

[MidnightWizard]

Communist Monopolies

I am personally tired of monopolies and the communists that support the notion of 'there can be only one'.

There has never been a "Communist" state

USSR = Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics

and there are no "real" communists ( at least as envisaged by Karl Marx )

In the USSR ( and other SOCIALIST systems ) there was / is only one player -- the STATE , so talking about Monopolies is something of an Oxymoron.

More fitted to a system that follows the idea of "Social-Darwinism" -- something like Capitalism. ( as we seem to see it being practised today -- "dog-eat-dog" and "survival-of-the-fittest" )

Now whether MultiChoice ( MonoChoice) is a Monopoly or not is a valid question -- whether it came into being in a "Capitalist" system -- OR -- something else is also a question worthy of debate.

"there can be only one" is Duncan MacLeods tagline in the TV series "HIGHLANDER"


the IMMORTAL one

 

[ic]

<very_off_topic>

There has never been a "Communist" state

USSR = Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics
...
the IMMORTAL one

Just bcos the name includes the notion of socialism, does not mean that it was in fact socialist, in reality it was very much communist - which is not a good thing [for the people] in practice, i.e. socialism is the idealistic theoretical warm & fuzzy notion, whilst communism is the harsh reality.

You clearly have socialism confused with communism and visa versa.​

</very_off_topic>

BTW, MonoChoice is a de facto PayTV operator monopoly simply bcos there are no other active & competing PayTV operators in South Africa - it is not a question that needs debating, it is a fact!!!

 

[MarthinusSwart]

I see alot of talk of how bad MultiChoice is and then how dumb the general public is when it comes to what other PayTV operators offer in other countries.

Well in SA and indeed in the whole of Africa, MultiChoice is the best option you can get. Comparing DSTV to something like SABC, both available in Africa, makes DSTV worth the money. No use comparing DSTV to something in the firts world countries, does not make sense at all.

With the current guvvament running eveything into the ground, DSTV will be the best payTV this country will ever have.

 

[MidnightWizard]

REJOINDER

<very_off_topic>
You clearly have socialism confused with communism and visa versa.
</very_off_topic>

I DO

COMMUNIST MANIFESTO

Try reading the info on this page ( and on the rest of this site )

We quite clearly see things differently -- so -- don't refer to my posts and I won't refer to yours.

Capiche


Thanks


the MEROVINGIAN

 

[PeterCH]

There has never been a "Communist" state

USSR = Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics

You kidding me. The USSR was as Communist as they come.

USSR was as Communist as one possibly can get and they saw themselves as such,
and Communism is an extreme form of Socialism in simplest terms -
Communism is a subset of Socialism.

I know what you're trying to say - at it's core Communism as envisaged by Marx and Engels and put into practice by Lenin - was to be a government-less utopia where 'each worker contributes according to the best of his ability and then takes as much and only as much as he needs'.

However, this never worked out largely because in order to establish the Communist Society you first have to socially engineer the society on a mass scale to become selfless and contribute more than they take plus remove all personal ambition plus remove all those who cannot be rehabilitated - for that 10-20% of the population has to be liquidated - usually the aristocracy, middle class and all the above average performers including top workers and intellectuals to level the society to more or less the lowest common denominator. The transitional period is the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. The resultant Bolshevism of the USSR wasn't true
Communism but that purest utopia comprising brainwashed zombies can never materialise because human nature acts against it, it remained largely at the Dictatorship of the Proletariat level. Killing of the creme of society
only led to a dark age of idiot bureaucracy.

Bolsheviks ultimately moulded the remaining theoretical Communists (around the world) into their image OR got rid of them. Stalin himself eliminated the majority of international Communists, from the VII Comintern on:

(WikiPedia article on the Comintern with very conservative figures):

The Stalin purges of the 1930s affected Comintern activists living in both the USSR and overseas. At Stalin's direction, the Comintern was thoroughly infused with Soviet secret police and foreign intelligence operatives and informers working under Comintern guise. One of its leaders, Mikhail Trilisser, using the pseudonym 'Mikhail Aleksandrovich Moskvin', was in fact chief of the foreign department of the Soviet OGPU (later, the NKVD). At Stalin's orders, 133 out of 492 Comintern staff members became victims of the Great Purge. Several hundred German Communists and antifascists who had either fled from Nazi Germany or were convinced to relocate in the Soviet Union were liquidated, and more than a thousand were handed over to Germany.[28] Fritz Platten died in a labor camp; the leaders of the Indian (Virendranath Chattopadhyaya or Chatto), Korean, Mexican, Iranian and Turkish Communist parties were executed. Out of 11 Mongolian Communist Party leaders, only Khorloogiin Choibalsan survived. A great number of German Communists were handed over to Hitler. Leopold Trepper recalled these days: "In house, where the party activists of all the countries were living, no-one slept until 3 o'clock in the morning.[..] Exactly 3 o'clock the car lights began to be seen [...]. we stayed near the window and waited [to find out], where the car stopped."[29]

As for the party in charge of the Soviet Union, it was called a 'Communist' Party:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_the_Soviet_Union

You will find that the remaining parties of Cuba, Eastern Europe, Asia and South America who ran pro-Soviet regimes or aspired to that level were all 'Communist' in name or had an euphemistic "United Worker's Party" type name.

Anyway off topic but despite the dictatorship which is associated with Communism these days, the founders of Communism were genocidal maniacs and believed in mass terror and decisive action - having learned their lesson with the fall of the Paris Communes of the 1800s. Subsequent generations of Western Communists (see link quoted) also believe in decisive action - eliminate the ruling classes and the rich (and their support) before they can stop the criminal movement called Communism from capturing power by violent means.

George Watson has written a great analysis of the early history of Communism, some of it is available for free via Google Books:
http://books.google.co.za/books?id=F3EmtyNuKfQC&pg=PA3&dq="The+forgotten+French+of+1848"#PPA63,M1

OK, Off Topic Off.

 

[zamicro]

This is not good enough..

ICASA should be blamed for issuing licenses to people who didn't even attempt to launch a service.... and the licensees who have got a license but aren't using it (and I'm pointing my finger at esat) should be fined...

I agree 100%. And what about those that wanted to compete but Icasa decided that they cannot compete?

 

[smartguy]

the timely raising of fees and decoders etc is telling as to what multichoice thinks of the competition.

 

[moabin]

I'm not so sure why multi choice is always seen as the bad guy (monopoly) they are always showing the best shows/movies/mini-series and not to mention the largest broadcaster of the sport in Africa. They were also the first to introduce HD, I happily pay my monthly fee knowing that the quality of the programming is of the highest quality.

I would hate to think what SA television would be like without them.

Have you seen TV outside of SA?
Of course its your right to have that opinion, but it really only makes sense when comparing to SABC/Etv.

The question becomes: should we settle for what we are offered now. or desire what we know could be offered now.*

* a working PVR is the least of these wishes. has nothing to do with channel programming

 

[zamrg]

Have you seen TV outside of SA?
Of course its your right to have that opinion, but it really only makes sense when comparing to SABC/Etv.

The question becomes: should we settle for what we are offered now. or desire what we know could be offered now.*

* a working PVR is the least of these wishes. has nothing to do with channel programming

I don't think we should be comparing Multichoice to SABC or even ETV, as the latter aren't pay-tv operators. We all know the one is a public broadcaster, and the other a private, free entity and therefore they don't really compete with DSTV or offer very similar services. If SABC or ETV were to bring out a premium rates service offering value added services, PVR, digital tv, etc, then it would make sense to do so. Until such point in time, Multichoice remain a monopoly and we're getting ripped for our money, no other way about it.

 

[antowan]

http://mybroadband.co.za/news/Telecoms/7484.htmlI strongly disagree with this line of questioning: in a capitalist system, it should never be left to a market regulator to decide how much competition should exist in that market - the market itself should determine how many competitors it can support, which means that the strongest survive and the weakest either get gobbled up by the strong or go bankrupt or are liquidated.

I absolutely agree! If there isn't a technical limitation i.e. no more spectrum and so forth then fine, but if there airwaves can carry it, let whoever wants to kick ass, give it a go. The regulator should just make sure there is no spectrum theft and so forth. They are NOT supposed to be there to make sure everybody can make money like they do currently. It is NOT a wise thing to allow.

It creates ample opportunity for the three Cs

CORRUPTION. CORRUPTION. CORRUPTION...

 

[Telkomhater]

Here in Australia there are 5 pay TV stations: Foxtel, Austar, Optus, Telstra TV and Select TV. We are with Fox and we pay A$115 (R800) a month. Yes we get like 200 channels but many are so crap we dont watch them ever.

The bonus thing here is that you dont need Pay TV because all the mainline shows are only on Free-to-Air channels.

I was DSTV's biggest critic but I must say if I had a choice I would take DSTV here over Foxtel anyday.

 

[Submolecule]

Have you seen TV outside of SA?
Of course its your right to have that opinion, but it really only makes sense when comparing to SABC/Etv.

The question becomes: should we settle for what we are offered now. or desire what we know could be offered now.*

* a working PVR is the least of these wishes. has nothing to do with channel programming

Yes, I have seen TV in the USA. I must say that the hardware is the best in the world (Tevo,cable etc) but then the programming is scattered through the three main channels. The content is top quality as they get all the best shows, even they are repeated alot.

I agree that comparing dstv with sabc/etv is like comparing apples to pears.

Is it multichoice's fault that they have the monopoly?

Don't get me wrong, I disagree with any company having a monopoly, but sometimes we need to sit back and ponder why they have the monopoly.

Lets not forget that tv is not like the internet, where you get the same thing from Telkom or Neotel ie the ability to browse the internet ( obviosly speed and bandwidth is different, but this is not the arguement). I doubt that DSTV's competition will have the same shows as DSTV, so if we want to watch all the best shows we will have to fork out even more cash at month end.

Looking at the front page news of mybb, I cant see anyone having the capacity to match or better the current pay TV market.

 

[Rouxenator]

Things is, some content are network made and people will stick to the network purely because they like the productions it has. Like Egoli (soon to be dead) and Binnelanders. They are pretty much the only reason some people (me included) fork our R500 per month for DStv.