I agree, the HD thing is pure crap. Its the same channel, in HD and we pay more.In continuation with what I have written before.
In simple terms earlier the operators charged flat fee for a channel or a bouquet of channels. Then came the HD access fee thing where again they charged some flat fee annually or monthly for HD channel access if that channel was already in your package.
Then came the special Services stupidty. lets keep that aside for now.
Now they are asked to charge network capacity fees which is calculated based on number of channels subscribed. But d2h only transmits 1 channel at a time right? Not all channels at once. The STB decodes the freq based on the requested channel and displays the video on output. So they should either be charging only for 1 channel's network capacity or they should allow users to view multiple channels at once from same STB without any multi TV charge.
These kind of absurd charges just makes my belief more stronger that all this is being done to help JIO.
When JIO fiber will launch as a paid service(currently its free). They will not be liable to charge this Network Capacity fee as its a wired service and they are not transmitting OTA its a cable based where they transfer all the data as IP traffic. Not even as video data.
All d2h operators use to shield their services as data and software services to avoid some entertainment tax long time back and poor local cable guys who used analog video channels had to pay those.
Yeah, Most ignorant people do that only as its simple for them to blame the last link in the chain without trying to go deeper and understand the actual reasons.If I buy less and have to pay more, I will blame the people who sell it.
Just for the record, TRAI is around to protect the interests of the govt, not of the people. These regulations on DTH are meant to bring better transparency in costing and maximize taxation. Its not doing this with people's interests in mind. They are against bundling because operators offer different channels at different prices and the bundling process involves discounts and takes out the transparency in taxation. If it were up to them and it went as per plan, there would be no bundling at all. They would like the subscriber to pay full cost to subscribe to individual channels they desire and pay tax on it accordingly. You want 5 channels, you pay Rs 100 for it (in addition to distributor costs) and pay tax accordingly.The way I see the TRAI proposal is that its anti operator and anti broadcaster.
I am not sold on this being something to help the Ambani's.
As for airtel DTH that is not possible. Checked with them and any A-la-carte channels once subscribed need to be paid for the whole month even if discontinued in the middle.It will be interesting to see if I can subscribe and unsubscribe to A-la-carte channels at will.
I mean, like Pay-per-view, I would only subscribe to the sports channels when the matches I want to watch are on. That would mean maximum 8-10 days in a month. If they are going to charge at pro-rata daily basis, then someone like me can bring the pricing way down as my TV watching is mostly limited to sports on the weekends.
Can someone tell something. How can the price go up when we use lesser no. of channels than before ?
I think we should skip all paid channels for a couple of months. They will see sense and make them free to air.
So you're not just an ignoramus, but a liar and hypocrite as well. But this isn't new, we've seen your rabid illogical posts elsewhere as well.Why should I complain when I am getting 150 channels for ₹ 50 less than what I am paying now ? I think whoever did it, did a great thing. TRAI introduced pay per second just like this.
^^ Then why were you whining about the cost of pay channels. If you believe TRAI acted in your best interests, then you should also agree to their call on the premium channels, right? So, if you are so happy and content, why don't you just shut up and pay Rs 50 less for the 150 channels and be done? Let others who want to discuss further, do it. You have every right to be ignorant and/or even be stupid enough to believe that TRAI does things in the interests of the people, but you don't get to put decide what can be discussed here. Leave it to the mods to step in if the discussion goes off topic.Why should I complain when I am getting 150 channels for ₹ 50 less than what I am paying now ? I think whoever did it, did a great thing. TRAI introduced pay per second just like this.
So you mean mota bhai acted via madras high court to get this on his favour?Looking at this thread and the new e-commerce policy, I realized, that now Mota bhai is looking to make a foray into both these fields, the govt is suddenly keen on shutting down loopholes and making things more transparent so that he gets a level playing field. All this is being done under the garb of transparency of pricing details for the subscriber but it actually means DTH operators can no longer enter into fixed amount deals with broadcasters. Such a disgrace.
Wrong interpretation. Here is what TRAI asked for.For the people who are following this thread for facts: TRAI will be in Supreme Court this week to get that important 15% clause reinstated in the Original order which was struck down by Madras High Court favouring the broadcasters like Star. Basically the pricing between channel packs like Star Value pack and Alacarte cannot have more than 15% difference.
This 15% clause was the only thing which would have lowered Alacarte channel pricing to cheap levels, the alacarte pricing has already come down from the highs of Rs 75 to now Rs 19 for popular HD channels and after this 15% clause is reinstated prices will fall by another 50%. The old DTH 400-500 channels packs are the biggest scam and it is good the TRAI is booting this thing out.
On contrary the cost of the individual channels will go down as people will go only for a la carte thus diminishing the power of the broadcasters to push useless channels. Let's see. Time will tell.Wrong interpretation. Here is what TRAI asked for.
View attachment 78207
Basically, the TRAI is against the concept of bundling and wants pricing transparency if providers do bundle channels. As part of this.
1. They have setup rules against bundling free channels with pay channels.
2. The MRP of the bundle must be clearly indicated by broadcaster.
3. The MRP of a bundle should not be less than 85% the of the sum of cost of individual channels in that bundle.
So, its the other way around. if the clause is reinstated, the broadcasters will be required to change the cost of bundles so that they within 85% of the cost of individual channels in that pack.
The clause is made to discourage steep discounts on bundles.
For example, if they release a bundle of 5 sports channels, its cost must be between Rs 80.75 and Rs 95. They cannot offer it at less than Rs 80.75.[DOUBLEPOST=1546430873][/DOUBLEPOST]
Here is a annexure from TRAI's document on how bundles are to be treated.
View attachment 78208[DOUBLEPOST=1546434430][/DOUBLEPOST]Here is an example.
Below pack costs Rs 145 for the bundle, but adding up the individual channels costs Rs 280. So, if the clause struck off by High court is reinstated,StarTV would be required to change the bundle price to a minimum of 280 x 85% = Rs 238. The increase would mean higher taxes to govt.
View attachment 78209
If they (broadcasters and operators ) collude, and they will, the prices will be kept higher.Exactly, this 15 percent discount will increase the price of bouqet/channel bundle, unless the broadcaster drastically reduce hte price of al carte to match the bundle price, which I doubt. They would be happy to increase the bundled price, if anything Trai is government and broadcaster friendly.
But doesn't the rule state that you can have a one day lock in period, as mentioned in some dth forums.
Well, that is what some people are hoping, but time and again, it has been proven in numerous instances that such regulation doesn't help in driving down prices. They will simply shut down the channels that are not being subscribed enough rather than reduce prices.On contrary the cost of the individual channels will go down as people will go only for a la carte thus diminishing the power of the broadcasters to push useless channels. Let's see. Time will tell.
We are talking about crap channels, if you are paying for a bouquet which has it, its a waste already. You just did not have an option as ala carte was more. You are thinking in terms of quantity. I would say shut down the useless channels and put up more quality ones.Well, that is what some people are hoping, but time and again, it has been proven in numerous instances that such regulation doesn't help in driving down prices. They will simply shut down the channels that are not being subscribed enough rather than reduce prices.
For example, there is pricing regulation for farmers to ensure they get some min price for their crops. What actually happens is that no broker will buy at more than the min price set by govt and hence they end up selling for min price or risk losing that too. Basically min price becomes the max price.
Same thing here. You already see that happening. TRAI gave some max price caps and all service providers settled on those prices only. Max price set by regulator becomes the min price.