From: hughes@gary.enet.dec.com (Gary Hughes - VMS Development)
Newsgroups: rec.video.satellite
Subject: Re:      Re: Opinions on DirecTv SkyCable DBS Stuff
Date: 17 Nov 92 15:38:31 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


In article <9211161200.AA29642@lopez.marquette.MI.US>,         Gary Bourgois <flash@LOPEZ.MARQUETTE.MI.US> writes...
>>I'd like to know if anyone has any opinions on the up coming (1994?)
>>release of the DirecTv Direct Broadcast Satallite (DBS) system from Hughes
>>et. al.
> 
>>Has anyone heard of this?
> 
There has been quite a lot of information released about it. I attended a
seminar in May on Digital Television where Hughes discussed a lot of the
details.

>I personally see no reason for someone with a steerable C/KU system to
>actually BUY into it, except for those with families who want to get off
>cable, but by its nature, DirecTV is no better than cable, and in some ways
>it is WORSE than cable from the standpoint of MONOPOLY CONTROL.  ONE MSO for
>the whole country?  Definately NOT my idea of CHOICE>

This may very well be the case. However not all of the transponders will be
owned by Hughes' DirecTV. Some will be owned by Stan Hubbard's USSB and he is
still talking about advertiser-supported, non-subscription programming. How it
all pans out remains to be seen.

BTW, Echosphere supposedly has approval to start construction of their high
power DBS satellites.

It should be noted however that there have been many false starts in the DBS
area, some even getting as far as satellite construction (ever wonder how
Intelsat K went from concept to operation so quickly?). I'm fairly confident
that something will come of the DirecTV venture, but I'd be reluctant to
predict what it will be.

> 
>Still, the technology is interesting.  The actual transmission technology is
>proven, based upon the ASTRA system in Europe (One of the investors,
>Thompson, is heavily involved in ASTRA)  BUT Unlike ASTRA, which has MANY
>CLEAR FREE channels that can be picked up with a regular KU system, DirecTV
>is a digitally compressed system, and requires you not only PAY for your box
>but also requires a subscription to see much of anything.  We have heard
>there will be a few "unscrambled" channels (Digitized but not encrypted, in
>other words you won't have to pay to watch them) but what these will be we do
>not know.

Thomson's only involvement (a big one though) is the design of the receiver in
return for exclusive rights to manufacture the first 1 million units. The
agreement also specifies a maximum retail price of $700 ea for these units.
Hughes described the complexity of the receiver as roughly equivalent to a
"high end Mac".

I'm not aware of any technology transfer from Astra. The source coding, channel
coding and satellite design are not related to Astra. It is possible that they
may use some of the conditional access developed for MAC-Paquet, I guess.

> 
>Unlike SKYPIX and PRIMESTAR, DirecTV has DEEP POCKETS behind it, and I
>predict it is going to go BIG.  It is what Joe Consumer wants.  A tiny dish,
>and NO cable.  Indeed, for people who PAY for their programming (and
>certainly MOST do) a lot will depend on COST factors.

Yup.

>I am trying to get as much technical and marketing and programming
>information on the system as possible, so whatever you have, we would ALL be
>interested!

I believe I posted my notes from the presentation in May to this group. If you
don't have them for some reason, let me know and I'll type them in again.

NRTC have leased a few transponders on the DirecTV birds to carry a number of
basic cable type channels, for sale to NRTC members only (so as not to be in
direct competition to cable). I seem to recall 5 transponders carrying 20
channels as the numbers. I think they will use this to establish an initial
critical mass of receivers, and I also think that the restriction will go away
shortly thereafter.

gary
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU