DTV/Echostar Merge

[lamedss]

January 7, 2002

Lawmakers Urge Rejection of Satellite TV Deal
Television: Western House members say the proposed EchoStar- DirecTV merger would hurt rural constituents.

By ROBERT GEHRKE, ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON -- A group of Western lawmakers is urging the Federal Communications Commission and the Justice Department to reject a proposed merger between two satellite television giants, arguing that the deal would hurt their rural constituents.

By reducing the number of providers, the proposed $26-billion merger of EchoStar Communications Corp. and DirecTV would put rural subscribers--who can't subscribe to cable because lines have not been laid there--at the mercy of a monopoly and drive up prices, 15 Western House members wrote in a letter Friday.

"In the EchoStar-DirecTV case, the result for rural America will be a monopoly with essentially no hope of future entrants in the marketplace," the legislators said in their letter to Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft and FCC Chairman Michael Powell. Ashcroft and Powell have to give their blessings to the merger for it to occur. A decision is expected by midyear.

Rep. Chris Cannon (R-Utah), vice chairman of the Western Caucus, said he was astonished that the two companies would push such a flawed merger.

"It is hard to imagine a more clear-cut example of a merger that violates our competition laws," Cannon said.

"This merger as proposed is unthinkable and it should not take the Justice Department and FCC much time to deny it."

Judianne Atencio, spokeswoman for Littleton, Colo.-based EchoStar, said the merger would help bring rural America high-speed satellite Internet, high-definition television stations and interactive distance learning programs they can't get now.

"We believe that once government officials and some of these rural special-interest groups really examine some of the issues surrounding this merger, they'll not only approve of it but extol it to others because of the many benefits that the combined company can offer to consumers," she said.

Atencio also said the national pricing plan that is part of the merger would ensure that rural subscribers don't pay more than their urban counterparts.

EchoStar, which runs the Dish Network, said in October that it planned to buy Hughes Electronics Corp., the El Segundo-based parent of DirecTV.

DirecTV is the largest satellite TV operator, with 10.3 million subscribers. At the time the deal was valued at $26 billion.

If the deal goes through, EchoStar will control about 90% of the U.S. digital satellite TV market and have about 17 million subscribers--more than AT&T Corp., the nation's leading cable TV provider.

The House members said such a monopolized market would not offer any incentive to innovate or meet consumer needs.

The letter was signed by 16 lawmakers, including Reps. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-San Diego), Howard P. "Buck" McKeon (R-Santa Clarita), Richard W. Pombo (R-Tracy) and Wally Herger (R-Marysville).

Shares of Hughes Electronics tracking stock rose 1 cent to $16.26 on the New York Stock Exchange on Friday. EchoStar shares climbed 10 cents to $28.59 on Nasdaq.

[icu819]

Just the beginning of the U.S. lawmakers rejecting the merger, now if we can get our lawmakers to backup the supreme court case ruling this spring (we will win) us canadians can truly enjoy this hobby!

[seymour_teevee]

Maybe. But, personally, I got a gut feeling there's gonna be a lot hair-shirt angst among Canuck pirates, and PD administrators, in 2 or 3 months. Time'll tell. I agree that the Dish Network/DirecTV merger is far from a shoe-in. Even a lot of traditional "legitimate TV forum" members, who were initially all for the deal on the basis of shared bandwidth (better PQ due to ellimination of dupplication of effort reasons), are having second thoughts about the proposed merger now. Not that their opinions (or mine) carry any weight with Congress, the FTC, or the FCC, but some people are showing signs of intelligent life on this planet about a single U.S. DBS distribution service. Time'll tell. Now let the flames begin. Unlike certain notables on this forum, I have a thick hide and handle slings and arrows quite well. Bye.

[gunsmoke2]

I got a gut feeling there's gonna be a lot hair-shirt angst among Canuck pirates, and PD administrators, in 2 or 3 months.



What PD administrators are you referring to seymour. First you try to scare the s h i t out of everyone. Then you say you don't like Canadians and everyone should own one. You go out of your way to talk about felony convictions on civil matters and much more.


Do you have so much free time at NDS ?


PD administrators help members and provide a positive atmosphere for discussions and personally you are not worth it IMHO.


Personally I thought this site was much better when you were at read only member instead of having you spread so much hate scare Bull.


If you think there will be alot of hair shirt angst PD administrators in 2 or 3 months then please do everyone here a favor and leave now as we can handle the three months without you just fine.



GS2

[icu819]

GS2 you are 100% correct!!!!!!!!

[gunsmoke2]

Well to be fair to seymour I decided to look up "angst" in case I misintrepretated his meaning



angst
noun [U]
strong anxiety and unhappiness, esp. about personal problems
He is genuinely a man troubled by angst, by constant worries over the great spiritual questions.
All my children went through a period of late-adolescent angst.



seymour,


We have had much aniety and unhappiness for years now so what's your point. Have you not read all the legal problems that Canadians have been dealing with for over three years now.

You need not worry or concern yourself about Canadians as we will do just fine no matter what and besides you couldn't care less.


Everyone should own one that being a Canadian according to you.


GS2

[seymour_teevee]

Heh, heh, heh. Whatever, GS2. Like you, I have no more input on the outcome of the Canadian Supreme Court decision than the man in the moon. But if, and that's a big "if", the decision goes against the black and gray subscribers, there will be big changes in store for DirecTV signal pirates and dealers across Canada regardless of your sarcasm and terminal denial regarding the possibility: as in at least the same level of attention currently bestowed on ExpressVu and Star Choice piracy. As an administrator, you'd have to be already aware that Risestar has editorialized exactly the same opinion. Now, you go right on pretending I'm your personal whipping boy (one of the perks of being an administrator, eh?). Like I said, my hide is tough enough to handle whatever you throw at me. But, I wish you a genuinely a nice day. And, there'll always be meals and lodging waiting for you at my home.

[simple]

what is the deal between Seemore_teevee and GS2 anyways???



Simple.

[gunsmoke2]

seymour are you capable of reading ? I know I ask this before but never got an answer.. maybe you couldn't read the original question about reading.


I posted atleast once that I am only 50/50 with the outcome the SCC. Unlike you I atteneded the SCC hearing and can tell you how some of the judges will rule now. Also you know squat about the SCC or the BC Court of Appeals or the original BC Superior Court decision.


Some of your responses actually indicate that you might as well be the man on the moon eating cheese ;)


Your sarcastic remarks are noted not only by me but members who were the receiver of them.


Wake up seymour because we have been talking about the "if" for over a year here now and what the changes would mean. It would mean the closure of this site and many buisesses. Where have you been all this time ? on the moon ?

What do you think we have been saying in asking for Donations seymour ?

Honestly with no sarcasm please "read" seymour before you make remarks about terminal denial. I have personally been planning new options for buisness as soon as I heard the SCC would be heard.


There is no star choice piracy seymour so what are you talking about.

I am more aware about Risestar because we talk to each other often and we were both together at the SC. He is more optimstic then me about the outcome. It has nothing to do with being an administrator but rather we are friends seymour.


Whipping boy ? now that's very twisted. I don't have to be an administrator to comment on your posts as many members do that anyway seymour.

When you come on and give false answers to members I'll be one of the first to say so. If you want to call it whipping then that's just fine by me.

Thanks for the invitation and please let me know when you are available for meals and room service but come down to earth first ;)


GS2

[seymour_teevee]

Wow, I had no idea I was honored to be in correspondence with someone who has an inside straight to the voting liklihood of several of the Supreme Court justices. (Before you inquire, yes, that was sarcasm.) Amazing facts. And, all without the safety net of a Ouiji board! (So was that.) You actually believe their questions represent the direction they're leaning? Really? As long as you got your dictionary handy, GS2, look up the definitions of, "naive". As long as we're both doing high-wire balancing acts, I'll prognosticate without a safety net, too: the decision will be unanimous and in favor of BEV.

[gunsmoke2]

LOL,

I guess you never been to court hearings with multiple judges seymour or judges period.


Well its about time you did seymour. For example seymour at the BC Court of Appeals one Judge who was sick was replace that day with a new one.

It was so obvious by her dialogue that she would rule in favor of Bell. She just about said it many times. So yes I perdicted 100% along with the lawyer representing Can-Am that she would not rule in Can-Am's favor. She didn't.

Some of the lawyers have been in front of the same judges many times.

There is one Judge seymour at the SCC that always rules for the Government. At the SCC again it was obvious that she will do the same and rule for ExpressVu and the Government.

At lower Court rulings it was also in some cases ever so obvious how the Judge would rule. At one Quebec case the judge was so mad at the crown that it wasn't a matter of how he would rule it was just a matter of when. He ruled later that day in favor of the defendents and yes I was there. At the other Quecbec Superior case the judge ask the crown if he had anything new to add and that he was waiting for his call to cancel. Now seymour what do think happened ? with all you sarcastic comments that seem to be a camourflash for being uninformed I hope atleast you do read and learn something.


Everytime you post you seem to add something new that translates that you are struggling. Go balance yourself on two feet so you don't have to be so "naive" in your feeble attempts to post something credible.

This also ends our uncalled remarks. Time to move forward seymour.

Tone it down please

Thank you

GS2

[seymour_teevee]

Post deleted. You're right, GS2 - time to move on. Peace?

[gunsmoke2]

Geez seymour I missed what you edited out. I am not at war with you and I don't believe you are with me.


We obviously disagree at times and we both have strong opinions and views. Theres nothing wrong with that.

What's wrong is that we both get carried and results in name calling.

For me that's what we need to avoid. We can still disagree and debate but more maturly.


I would like to point out that my mother.. Grandmother.. mother in law are Americans. Half of my family are Americans. I like both countries and their citizens. The point ? need to restrain from the Canadian/American thingy.


Peace bro


GS2

[seymour_teevee]

If you have that many Yanks in the family, you know we're all born kidders. But, if it's a personal sensitivity issue, I'll lay off. Chalk it up to a cultural thingy. (Hint: if you watch Bill Maher, you have some idea where I'm coming from.)