Dish Network launches $25.5B bid to merge with Sprint

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 29
    [VIDEO][/VIDEO]

    No, no, that is where you are wrong.

    http://www.smartbrief.com/12/04/11/verizon-deal-illustrates-value-dish-spectrum-holdings#.UW6no4y9KSM

    They own valuable cell spectrum right now. They were approved to convert some of their satellite spectrum to cell as well.
  • Reply 22 of 29
    There's an 800 millisecond delay at the absolute minimum. You'll notice that on phone calls (worse experience) and multiplayer games will be unplayable. So it's no good for Apple's phones.

    For the Apple TV, the answer isn't "wait at home between 8 AM and 9 PM for some guy to disrupt your life to install a satellite dish on your house". It's Internet. That's how its content will be served.

    It is also about the current contracts with the networks that they have so far been unsuccessful at securing.
  • Reply 23 of 29
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by bmason1270 View Post

    It is also about the current contracts with the networks that they have so far been unsuccessful at securing.


     


    Sure; I see where you're coming from there. But that won't matter. You can't just buy up negotiations. If Apple bought a telecom, all previous contracts would be null and void past their existing terms. Apple would be forced to see them through to all parties in all previous forms, and then poof, they'd be gone. Start from scratch all over again, except now with expensive satellites and incompetent installation systems.

  • Reply 24 of 29
    Sure; I see where you're coming from there. But that won't matter. You can't just buy up negotiations. If Apple bought a telecom, all previous contracts would be null and void past their existing terms. Apple would be forced to see them through to all parties in all previous forms, and then poof, they'd be gone. Start from scratch all over again, except now with expensive satellites and incompetent installation systems.

    Satellites are cheaper than miles and miles of fiber.

    Latency is only an issue for head to head online gaming.

    Direct TV has been bought and sold three times without such crisis. What it does is get Apple into the door with an established install base.

    Owning the spectrum though is the secret sauce. For an Apple TV to be done hypothetically, "the Apple Way" there are to many distribution models and contracts to negotiate. To many variances in delivery service and quality to ensure national coverage. And, to convince them all to hand over the keys to Apple.
  • Reply 25 of 29
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by bmason1270 View Post

    Satellites are cheaper than miles and miles of fiber.


     


    And slower. Who says Apple has to buy the fiber? And how is a satellite cheaper?!






    Latency is only an issue for head to head online gaming.



     


    And phone calls. And sending requests to web servers. And anything using the data.






    Direct TV has been bought and sold three times without such crisis.



     


    By and to whom? You're sure that they never had to renegotiate? Anyone in the industry would have an escape clause.






     What it does is get Apple into the door with an established install base.



     


    They don't want that hardware, they don't want that software, and they don't want that established stuff!

  • Reply 26 of 29
    And slower. Who says Apple has to buy the fiber? And how is a satellite cheaper?!

    And phone calls. And sending requests to web servers. And anything using the data.

    By and to whom? You're sure that they never had to renegotiate? Anyone in the industry would have an escape clause.

    They don't want that hardware, they don't want that software, and they don't want that established stuff!

    Satellite per coverage is cheaper.

    Who said anything about the satellites in regards to any level of telecom?

    They would have two delivery methods. Satellite AND telecom via cellular. This is even before the Dish purchase of Sprint.
  • Reply 27 of 29
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by bmason1270 View Post

    Satellite per coverage is cheaper.


     


    Hmm… That makes sense. Thanks.






    Who said anything about the satellites in regards to any level of telecom?



    You, when you said "buy Dish Network"… image






    They would have two delivery methods. Satellite AND telecom via cellular. This is even before the Dish purchase of Sprint.



     


    See, they don't want to own a telecom. They don't want a network. They don't want to support others' phones on their network. 

  • Reply 28 of 29
    Hmm… That makes sense. Thanks.
    You, when you said "buy Dish Network"… :???:

    See, they don't want to own a telecom. They don't want a network. They don't want to support others' phones on their network. 

    No, the satellites themselves do not need to be used for telecom. Dish owns extra telecom cell spectrum as well as current satellite spectrum conversion to telecom.

    They can lease their spectrum for use to deliver their two way content via cell and simply use satellite to push to home. Two different services meeting home and portable needs.
  • Reply 29 of 29
    Hmm… That makes sense. Thanks.
    You, when you said "buy Dish Network"… :???:

    See, they don't want to own a telecom. They don't want a network. They don't want to support others' phones on their network. 

    Is it out of the box? Sure but I think there are some unique opportunities to be had here. But, it isn't my $15 Billion either.
Sign In or Register to comment.