FCC considering caps on cable ownership
By Erik Hanson 
posted December 3rd 2007 12:23PM
posted December 3rd 2007 12:23PM
It's not all gifts for cable giant Comcast this holiday season, as the FCC is considering a new cap on cable ownership. FCC Chairman Kevin Martin and two of the Commissioners are set to support the cap plan, which would affect any company that controls over thirty percent of cable subscribers nationwide, while the remaining pair have not made their intentions public. The FCC has conducted additional market research to bolster their argument for limiting ownership, as a previous plan was rejected in 2004 by a federal judge. While the cable industry is sure to sue if the plan moves forward, perhaps Comcast should shore up any complaints on that pesky packet spoofing issue before this gets any uglier.
What is the point of the cap? There are so many sources and choices for home entertainment delivery: phone, dish, internet, and broadcast. I prefer to be able to pick what source and what company I want to subscribe with. The whole playing field is about to change with future iPhones and internet programming - in addition to power companies challenging cable. Things are just getting interesting - I wonder what lobby is behind this move? AT&T? Most likely.
How many people use their iPhone as their main home entertainment system? Uh.. None. Internet? Maybe a very few but not for long with the way broadband companies are throttling back bandwidth usage (Not to mention the "bandwidth shortage" that is coming...) So what's left? Yep, you guessed it; Dish and Cable.
You're crazy if you think the home entertainment delivery market is not going to change because of the iPhone. The iPhone doesn't even make up a fraction of a fraction of one percent of the services used to watch tv shows/movies.
I do think this FCC move is short-sighted. The only thing it's going to do is give Comcast another reason to jack up the rates. "Well the FCC won't let us widen our subscriber-base so we have to offset the costs by charging our current customers more." Breaking up the local monopolies on cable is the only way prices are going to come down, but I don't see that happening with the way the cable infrastructure is set up.
I agree with the previous commenter. Instead of capping cable ownership I think the FCC should be more interested in eliminating the local monopolies that cable companies have. I'd love to be able to have the choice between whatever cable company I wish to use. Luckily, I live in an area where I can get FiOs.
Richard S. writes:
"How many people use their iPhone as their main home entertainment system? Uh.. None. Internet? Maybe a very few but not for long with the way broadband companies are throttling back bandwidth usage (Not to mention the "bandwidth shortage" that is coming...) So what's left? Yep, you guessed it; Dish and Cable."
The article is about limiting single ownership of cable subscriberts to 30% nationally. My comments state simply that cable competes against phone companies, satellite, broadcast, and various internet channels. I then state that there is a whole new emerging market for mobile phones (iPhone) and internet. The article does not discuss cable exclusivity agreements with counties, etc. That is another issue entirely which deals with massive infrastructure costs and city or county tax collection.
The point I made above is simply new media channels are developing. Sophomoric comments such as the above lead me to believe that not everyone is paying attention. Simply take a look at Comcast stock - review market shares for other media channels - then again read the article - and make an informed comment.
Sorry, but you asked "What is the point of the cap?," as if it doesn't matter, since you say there are "so many sources and choices for home entertainment delivery," and then you go on to list services that are not widely available, even less widely used, and don't even register as competition to cable or dish.
All I'm saying is that cable does not compete with (and never will compete with) the iPhone regardless of what delusions of grandeur Apple has drilled into your head. If mobile delivery of TV/movies is ever widely adopted, it will be in addition to cable/dish; not in substitution of it.
The cap is designed to prevent a monopoly on the largest sector of home entertainment delivery (Hint: The FCC isn't concerned about Apple having a monopoly on entertainment delivery because it's less than 1% of the market in general.) I know exactly what the article said, and I was saying that this cap does not help consumers at all because it does nothing to break up the monopolies at the local level all over the country.