Commerce Commission issues warning to Sky

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › Commerce Commission issues warning to Sky

1 | 2

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#911497 9-Oct-2013 16:55

Jas777: old3eyes,

How can the government regulate the selling of overseas content such as a TV programme made by HBO?

I could understand if they said that an event that is in the national interest had to be on FTA or mutliple platforms but a 'fanatasy TV programme' such as GoT?

Them telling HBO that they couldn't sell that product to whomever they wanted wouldn't go down very well. It may be better for HBO's income if they sold it only to SKY as gauranteed income.

What I'm saying is the Com Com could say to Sky you can't block Quickflix who is partly owned by HBO from showing their subscribers in NZ from seeing the same HBO content as they do in Australia or they could say to Sky that you can't prevent people with NZ IP addresses from watching ANBL basket ball for a fraction of what it costs to watch on Sky. I suspect the only reason that Sommet can show the likes of Sunday Night Footbal from the US is because it's not on ESPN otherwize that would be blocked as well..

Regards,

Old3eyes

Jas777

838 posts

Ultimate Geek

#912035 10-Oct-2013 12:54

old3eyes,

So are you saying that anyone else should be allowed to show the NFL games that Sommet paid money to purchase the rights too?

So if SKY wanted to they could show those games and take viewers away from Sommet who in turn could get less advertising revenue?

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#912111 10-Oct-2013 15:00

Jas777: old3eyes,

So are you saying that anyone else should be allowed to show the NFL games that Sommet paid money to purchase the rights too?

So if SKY wanted to they could show those games and take viewers away from Sommet who in turn could get less advertising revenue?

I give up.. You can even buy a NFL Season Gamepass here in NZ to watch those same games something that the ANBL won't allow because of Sky..

Regards,

Old3eyes

bazzer

3438 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#912224 10-Oct-2013 18:43

hashbrown:
NonprayingMantis: "Is milk really that important you can't take your grocery dollar elsewhere?"

Nobody needs to drink cows milk or eat cheese.

Your comparing a source of nutritional protien with TV.

It's about priorities.

He's not really comparing them, he's making an analogy. There are plenty of other sources of nutritional protein.

hashbrown

463 posts

Ultimate Geek

#913424 11-Oct-2013 08:57

bazzer:
hashbrown:
NonprayingMantis: "Is milk really that important you can't take your grocery dollar elsewhere?"

Nobody needs to drink cows milk or eat cheese.

Your comparing a source of nutritional protien with TV.

It's about priorities.

He's not really comparing them, he's making an analogy. There are plenty of other sources of nutritional protein.

Just as there are plenty of other sources of entertainment. Thanks for supporting my argument.

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#913487 11-Oct-2013 10:09

hashbrown:
Kyanar: It's a matter of national importance to the Commerce Commission to investigate all monopolies, not just the ones you think are important. Sky is objectively speaking a monopoly in the Pay TV market. Not because the market has a high barrier to entry, but because everyone who has ever attempted to compete with them has given up - often after a shiny new wholesale agreement with Sky has been inked (cough, TelstraClear). That's pretty much the definition of a monopoly. Hence, they get investigated.

All government departments prioritise the usage of their finite resources, as provided to them by the NZ taxpayer. The ComCom doesn't investigate all monopolies, and I am guessing their criteria is largely based on the economic size of the market involved. Although I admit to being a cynical and beleiving in this case, punching Sky on the nose, wins quick political points.

Based on that Sky would be in scope, but I'm suggesting the ComCom's criteria for investigation should be different. Given that criteria is set by their political masters, who we all vote for, why am I not allowed to suggest that it be changed?

And you would be wrong. The Commerce Commission acts independently of the government ("political masters") and even frequently makes recommendations that said government wishes they'd shut their trap about (cough, Chorus wholesale copper access fee). The Commerce Commission that you lambast has done some really great things in their targeting of monopolies - it's thanks to them that you can even come here on this website to complain about them without worrying about going over your 1GB data cap for the month.

Secondly, the Commerce Commission cares about breaking abusive monopolies. They are not elected, and have no reason to score "political points".

Their criteria for investigation is simple - they investigate all unnatural monopolies (i.e. there's no point investigating natural monopolies that exist because the barrier to entry is so high that only a small few can afford to compete in the space, e.g. power companies), and any monopoly that is seen to abuse its dominant position to either take control of other markets, or to protect its monopoly position. Sky does do this. Constantly. So they got investigated.

These are the same criteria used by anti-competition authorities the world over (incidentally, none of them are actually really accountable to their governments - separation of interest is important there) and absolutely, no, they should not be changed.

hashbrown

463 posts

Ultimate Geek

#913535 11-Oct-2013 10:52

Kyanar:
And you would be wrong. The Commerce Commission acts independently of the government ("political masters") and even frequently makes recommendations that said government wishes they'd shut their trap about (cough, Chorus wholesale copper access fee). The Commerce Commission that you lambast has done some really great things in their targeting of monopolies - it's thanks to them that you can even come here on this website to complain about them without worrying about going over your 1GB data cap for the month.

Secondly, the Commerce Commission cares about breaking abusive monopolies. They are not elected, and have no reason to score "political points".

Their criteria for investigation is simple - they investigate all unnatural monopolies (i.e. there's no point investigating natural monopolies that exist because the barrier to entry is so high that only a small few can afford to compete in the space, e.g. power companies), and any monopoly that is seen to abuse its dominant position to either take control of other markets, or to protect its monopoly position. Sky does do this. Constantly. So they got investigated.

These are the same criteria used by anti-competition authorities the world over (incidentally, none of them are actually really accountable to their governments - separation of interest is important there) and absolutely, no, they should not be changed.

I've never attacked the Commerce Commisions work only their priorities and definition of "TV" as a specific market, not taking into account the wider "Entertainment" market Sky must compete in.

Section 26 of the Commerce Act.

Commission to have regard to economic policies of Government

(1) In the exercise of its powers under this Act, the Commission shall have regard to the economic policies of the Government as transmitted in writing from time to time to the Commission by the Minister.

(2) The Minister shall cause every statement of economic policy transmitted to the Commission under subsection (1) to be published in the Gazette and laid before Parliament as soon as practicable after so transmitting it.

(3) For the avoidance of doubt, a statement of economic policy transmitted to the Commission under this section is not a direction for the purposes of Part 3 of the Crown Entities Act 2004.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

Jas777

838 posts

Ultimate Geek

#913562 11-Oct-2013 12:11

old3eyes,

I take your point with the NFL pass and coverage of NFL in NZ. However if you applied the rules of NFL pass NBA, MLB tv etc at a minimum you can not watch the team in the area you live in if they are shown on a local channel. So in the case of the ANBL you could watch any game as long as it didn't have the Breakers playing.

As an aside with NFLpass it is only for overseas and there are 72 hour restriction on certain games shown on BsB.

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek

#913566 11-Oct-2013 12:22

Kyanar:
hashbrown:
Kyanar: It's a matter of national importance to the Commerce Commission to investigate all monopolies, not just the ones you think are important. Sky is objectively speaking a monopoly in the Pay TV market. Not because the market has a high barrier to entry, but because everyone who has ever attempted to compete with them has given up - often after a shiny new wholesale agreement with Sky has been inked (cough, TelstraClear). That's pretty much the definition of a monopoly. Hence, they get investigated.

All government departments prioritise the usage of their finite resources, as provided to them by the NZ taxpayer. The ComCom doesn't investigate all monopolies, and I am guessing their criteria is largely based on the economic size of the market involved. Although I admit to being a cynical and beleiving in this case, punching Sky on the nose, wins quick political points.

Based on that Sky would be in scope, but I'm suggesting the ComCom's criteria for investigation should be different. Given that criteria is set by their political masters, who we all vote for, why am I not allowed to suggest that it be changed?

And you would be wrong. The Commerce Commission acts independently of the government ("political masters") and even frequently makes recommendations that said government wishes they'd shut their trap about (cough, Chorus wholesale copper access fee). The Commerce Commission that you lambast has done some really great things in their targeting of monopolies - it's thanks to them that you can even come here on this website to complain about them without worrying about going over your 1GB data cap for the month.

Quite the opposite actually. It's thanks to them that we had 6-7 years of low low data caps because they brought in regulation that incentivised Telecom to keep datacaps as low as humanly possible

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#913772 11-Oct-2013 17:42

NonprayingMantis:
Quite the opposite actually. It's thanks to them that we had 6-7 years of low low data caps because they brought in regulation that incentivised Telecom to keep datacaps as low as humanly possible

And then fixed it. But your point is valid.

gregmcc

2147 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#913778 11-Oct-2013 17:52

The warning is really a bit of a joke, would the police every give you letter saying that we know you robbed that bank a while back, we have the evidence, but we arn't going to proscute as you seem to be doing the right thing now.

1 | 2