- Joined
- Jun 28, 2017
- Messages
- 7,223
- Reaction score
- 1,045
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: How do you normally pay for purchases in stores?
Set-top boxes won’t be encrypted – Minister
- Thread starter Newsfeed
- Start date
Gordon_R
Honorary Master
Very weak excuse IMO. Delays didn't stop the previous minister from repeatedly changing the rules.
MonoChoice must have sent 'n baaie lekker gift basket.
At this point it hardly matters since the SABC might not be broadcasting anything (encrypted or not), just do the migration to digital and free up the spectrum.
At this point it hardly matters since the SABC might not be broadcasting anything (encrypted or not), just do the migration to digital and free up the spectrum.
MonoChoice since the early 90s have invested heavily in set top boxes ie encryption & distribution as well as Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) ie set top boxes (predominantly via Altech UEC) besides content.
They have thus invested heavily in the ecosystem and see this as the cost/barrier to entry for other competitors. Ie if you want to roll out a pay channel you will need to distribute your own set top box which inhibits competition post legislative protection falling away.
By pushing encryption as part of the standard set top box, competition on the platform becomes open as the entry barrier is now removed. Ie no entry cost for consumer to buy a decoder.. ie this is just another situation of a monopoly in SA fighting very hard to maintain the status quo with what appears to be very obvious collusion, fraud and corruption via government and the SABC.
Basically Naspers/MultiChoice will pay heavily if evidence is found that this was the intent. In fact I’d say the Competition commission and there after the NPA and civil companies will launch many court cases against them in future.
The minister blocking a change of rollout means the tax payer will have to pay twice if this is forced to be corrected via court which I think it will. A lot of ANC ministers may end up in jail if NDZ is not elected and Ramaphosa tries to correct the path they heading.
Last edited:
system32
Executive Member
Without encryption, most premium content will not be allowed as the content can be pirated.
Content provides will not allow most of:
- HD content.
- Sport.
The addition of CAM (Conditional Access Module) would allow for billing.
I propose we skip DTT and go to DTH.
Free up the DTT frequency for more useful products.
strategis.ic.gc.ca/direct-to-home
"Direct-to-Home satellite broadcasting or DTH is the distribution of television signals from high-powered geostationary satellites to small dish antennas and satellite receivers in homes across the country."
Last edited:
elvis_presley
Expert Member
Politics and Multichoice scandal aside, I believe this is the right call, even if it was for the wrong reasons. This will mean that tuners given for free in future (and probably many current) TVs will work out the box without the need of a STB, and take that burden off the taxpayers in the long term.
The competition should stop moaning and find opportunity in the situation. Openview could pop a DTT tuner in their box and they already have a platform for pay tv.
I don't see why I, as a taxpayer, should subsidize conditional access for people profiting off the platform. If they want to broadcast premium content, they can do what every other pay tv operator since the beginning of time has done, and make their own plan for conditional access. Imagine the unholy cock-up that will ensue if the government tries to run it!
Look at the end-user costs involved here - even if a provider supplied their own STB, it'd only be a month or 2's subscription fees to pay it off. If their business plan can't cope with that, maybe they shouldn't be in the game.
The competition should stop moaning and find opportunity in the situation. Openview could pop a DTT tuner in their box and they already have a platform for pay tv.
I don't see why I, as a taxpayer, should subsidize conditional access for people profiting off the platform. If they want to broadcast premium content, they can do what every other pay tv operator since the beginning of time has done, and make their own plan for conditional access. Imagine the unholy cock-up that will ensue if the government tries to run it!
Look at the end-user costs involved here - even if a provider supplied their own STB, it'd only be a month or 2's subscription fees to pay it off. If their business plan can't cope with that, maybe they shouldn't be in the game.
Last edited:
system32
Executive Member
I hope so, but suspect the ZA version of DBV-T2 has a twist go prevent import of low quality desktop boxes.
Need consumers to view the very best of SABC propaganda.
Need to protect local manufacture (there are some articles on this)
Also ZA does not want neighbors to steal our subsidised boxes & signal.
Heisenborg
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2006
- Messages
- 22,278
- Reaction score
- 14,960
Ministers in jail. Lol i was taking u seriously upto this point
At the end of the day it’s about competition. If you are for monopolies then yes.. status quo is fine, go ahead and pay your R1k+ monthly because bundles don’t allow lower cost deals.
Since I don’t watch sports or any broadcast TV I can’t really care but for others this is a huge issue and this is the distribution part of a bigger chain of monopoly practices.
Ps this will also mean multiple STBs if you want an array of content from different providers. If you go to countries where they have a bank of POS machines.. for payment.. well welcome to the way your tv will be. It’s a mess that should have been legislatively fixed and tax payer would not need to pay.. each provider pays to use the platform. Even monochoice would pay for access if it went thru regardless of having their own decoder
Thanks krycor, this should be blogged somewhere, it's hard getting the clear intentions other than Multichoice's answers, I knew there was a reason they went to court over it, they wouldn't have wasted money on this if there wasn't a clear advantage for them.
elvis_presley
Expert Member
It will, which is why I said someone like OpenView has a MASSIVE opportunity here. I don't know why their parent company lobbying for government to include encryption in the STB's, they're pretty much killing the prospects of OpenView becoming a player in the DTT arena.
There's nothing stopping anyone else doing exactly what Multichoice is doing now.
elvis_presley
Expert Member
I'm not sure this is a sound argument. The STB's are only free for the poorest 10% of the population - basically the ones that won't be a good target market for pay-tv services. Everyone else will be forced to buy a decoder even to receive the free channels. This is not a market friendly situation.
I'm sure the Multichoice/SABC thing is corrupt as hell, but the end product of no encryption on the basic DTT spec is the right way to go IMO. Let the market take care of the pay services, government doesn't need to stick it's nose in here - the only possible reason I see them wanting to be involved is that it'd mean there's more money flying around and they can steal more of it.
Geoff.D
Honorary Master
The ignorance levels around this whole issue. , from those commenting in this thread to to the broadcasters arguing for encryption to the authorities is staggering.
All of you out there with digital TVs larger than 43" and new, should check to see if they don't already have DVB-T2 tuners and try and pick up the DTT signals already available.
This IS about FTA broadcasting. It SHOULD be unencrypted end of story. The ORIGINAL purpose of a STB was ONLY as a interim measure to allow the population with analogue TVs to be able to continue using those TVs. Nothing more, nothing less. ALL the other arguments are just BS.
No one is stopping anyone with an allocation of DTT capacity to provide their own STBs. No one is stopping ANY of the existing DTH service providers including a DVB-T2 tuner in their boxes just as they currently provide an
Analogue demodulator/modulator.
The entire debate is now moot, as the most important aspect is to complete the process and free up the spectrum for mobile use.
All of you out there with digital TVs larger than 43" and new, should check to see if they don't already have DVB-T2 tuners and try and pick up the DTT signals already available.
This IS about FTA broadcasting. It SHOULD be unencrypted end of story. The ORIGINAL purpose of a STB was ONLY as a interim measure to allow the population with analogue TVs to be able to continue using those TVs. Nothing more, nothing less. ALL the other arguments are just BS.
No one is stopping anyone with an allocation of DTT capacity to provide their own STBs. No one is stopping ANY of the existing DTH service providers including a DVB-T2 tuner in their boxes just as they currently provide an
Analogue demodulator/modulator.
The entire debate is now moot, as the most important aspect is to complete the process and free up the spectrum for mobile use.
I think you are either oversimplifying the issues or you're naive when it comes to the monopoly stranglehold that MonoChoice wants to maintain for as long as it possibly can.
As for people who have TVs larger than 43" ("and new"), how sure are you that people who can afford such TVs, would even want to watch any of the propaganda that is broadcast on SABC channels?
The cANCer party is running out of time ahead of the 2019 elections and ANN7 is unlikely to be on air at that time, so broadcasting electioneering propaganda on SABC channels is now critical and the sooner STBs are rolled out to voters the more brainwashing there will be before the voting stations open for business.
Geoff.D
Honorary Master
The Minister is spot on right to end the debate on encryption. The STB has always ONLY been about facilitating the migration process. It is the politicians that tried to complicate matters with trying to use the STB box to promote local manufacture beyond what was ALREADY being done in SA. It is the same with the idea to use encryption to "force" people to pay their TV licence fees.
The rest of the crap about protecting MC monopoly is just rubbish! MC have their own STB already for their DTT pay TV service and if you want to receive that then you need to get their STB. Ditto with e-TV. IF they do ever implement their pay-tv service, they would need to have their own STB.
The real issue is why local TV manufacturers are not including DVB-T2 tuners in the smaller TVs, and HD ready TVs. Without encryption, they should be doing that, making the need for a STB box to receive FTA stuff completely unnecessary!
As to why DVB -T2 tuners are included in the more expensive TVs? Yes it makes very little technical sense. The upmarket user who an afford the higher priced TVs is using the Tv for access to all sorts of other services. That segment is the least likely to be interested in accessing DTT servicers, yet their TVs have a built-in DVB-T2 tuner??
MC does not need to protect its Monopoly. There are other Pay-TV broadcasters around in the DTH space. They are struggling to get access to content, nothing more. It is NOT a technical issue at all. As to DTT pay-tv services? Well the only potential one around IS GO-TV, who apparently have two flavours available (Apparently because I have NO personal experience of either service, so are going on hearsay evidence at this stage).
e-TV has been talking about it for years. What they wanted initially (as came out in the court case) was for the tax payer in this country to subsidise their business plan with the inclusion of encryption in the STB issued by the government. THAT is where the REAL corruption investigation should be, NOT about some hair brained conspiracy about protecting MCs monopoly.
The court case (maybe all should read the judgement again?) sorted out all of this and showed where the issue lay. Granted MC DID midstream change its tune and maybe their motives were not fully exposed as to WHY they changed their stance?
BUT technically, the situation has always been about the STB being an interim measure to allow the continued use of old analogue TVs AFTER the migration, end of story. The endless delays has now seen to it that most people entering the market for the first time buy digital TVs anyway. Even the DOC was issuing persons with digital TVs when giving the indigent their "Free" STBs. AND that is ONLY necessary because the smaller TVS and HD ready TVs do not have DVB-T2 tuners in them!
Even my el cheapo 32" HD Ready TV ( imported a few ears ago, probably by mistake on someone's part, hence why the TV went off the market so quickly) has a DVB -T2 tuner in it! Why is HISENSE not manufacturing their low end TVs with DVB-T2 tuners in them? Is this to protect a few fat cats sitting with warehouses full of STBs maybe? There is where the corruption investigation should be. Why is the ANC trying so desperately trying to cling to the encryption argument? And why is the new Minister now suddenly able to do what should have been done 10 years ago? What has changed? is the Mobile Industry lobby now pushing harder than the other lobby?
The rest of the crap about protecting MC monopoly is just rubbish! MC have their own STB already for their DTT pay TV service and if you want to receive that then you need to get their STB. Ditto with e-TV. IF they do ever implement their pay-tv service, they would need to have their own STB.
The real issue is why local TV manufacturers are not including DVB-T2 tuners in the smaller TVs, and HD ready TVs. Without encryption, they should be doing that, making the need for a STB box to receive FTA stuff completely unnecessary!
As to why DVB -T2 tuners are included in the more expensive TVs? Yes it makes very little technical sense. The upmarket user who an afford the higher priced TVs is using the Tv for access to all sorts of other services. That segment is the least likely to be interested in accessing DTT servicers, yet their TVs have a built-in DVB-T2 tuner??
MC does not need to protect its Monopoly. There are other Pay-TV broadcasters around in the DTH space. They are struggling to get access to content, nothing more. It is NOT a technical issue at all. As to DTT pay-tv services? Well the only potential one around IS GO-TV, who apparently have two flavours available (Apparently because I have NO personal experience of either service, so are going on hearsay evidence at this stage).
e-TV has been talking about it for years. What they wanted initially (as came out in the court case) was for the tax payer in this country to subsidise their business plan with the inclusion of encryption in the STB issued by the government. THAT is where the REAL corruption investigation should be, NOT about some hair brained conspiracy about protecting MCs monopoly.
The court case (maybe all should read the judgement again?) sorted out all of this and showed where the issue lay. Granted MC DID midstream change its tune and maybe their motives were not fully exposed as to WHY they changed their stance?
BUT technically, the situation has always been about the STB being an interim measure to allow the continued use of old analogue TVs AFTER the migration, end of story. The endless delays has now seen to it that most people entering the market for the first time buy digital TVs anyway. Even the DOC was issuing persons with digital TVs when giving the indigent their "Free" STBs. AND that is ONLY necessary because the smaller TVS and HD ready TVs do not have DVB-T2 tuners in them!
Even my el cheapo 32" HD Ready TV ( imported a few ears ago, probably by mistake on someone's part, hence why the TV went off the market so quickly) has a DVB -T2 tuner in it! Why is HISENSE not manufacturing their low end TVs with DVB-T2 tuners in them? Is this to protect a few fat cats sitting with warehouses full of STBs maybe? There is where the corruption investigation should be. Why is the ANC trying so desperately trying to cling to the encryption argument? And why is the new Minister now suddenly able to do what should have been done 10 years ago? What has changed? is the Mobile Industry lobby now pushing harder than the other lobby?
Last edited: