OK, here's a Divisystem that was desinged for Tele-TV, that's deploying..............
multichannel.com
SBC Tiptoes Into L.A. Cable Market
By KENT GIBBONS & LINDA HAUGSTED
Los Angeles -- Against a backdrop of merger talks between AT&T Corp. and SBC Communications Inc., Pacific Bell Video Services has quietly started signing up paying customers for the digital wireless cable system in Los Angeles that parent company SBC had considered scrapping.
The tentative start, notably short on fanfare (or advertising), fuels continued speculation that SBC felt that it had to launch the system because of the $300 million or so that it had invested in it so far, but that it might seek to sell the system later. SBC, which acquired PacBell parent Pacific Telesis Group, had said that the wireless cable launch was under review, along with other PacTel operations.
PacBell said it plans a "gradual" rollout to make sure that the service quality is high and to test market acceptance. The company has already been offering the service to several thousand nonpaying customers.
PBVS has begun marketing the 150-channel Pacific Bell Digital TV, apparently by direct mail, to residents of Los Angeles and Orange County, Calif. Customer-service representatives at the service's toll-free number said the company is ready to serve any home with a clear line of sight from Mount Majeska or Mount Wilson -- the two sites of the wireless service's transmission towers.
Although the wireless provider is not bound by federal must-carry rules, PBVS will include off-air stations in its 49-channel basic package, which is priced at $31.95 a month. The telco has said that it plans to market the service as the equivalent to direct-broadcast satellite, with the addition of digitally delivered local channels.
It also includes digital audio service Music Choice, an interactive guide, a universal remote and "The Galaxy" -- the enhanced pay-per-view service designed by Tele-TV, the video consortium of PacTel, Bell Atlantic Corp. and Nynex Corp. Bell Atlantic and Nynex abandoned their plans for digital wireless TV and recently negotiated terms for their wireless cable affiliate, CAI Wireless Systems Inc., to repay their investment.
A package including basic, a 10-channel tier and a premium service is priced at $45.95 a month. Individual premium services cost $8.
SBC's plans for continuing its hardwire cable operation in San Jose, Calif., are also a subject of speculation. Responding to media inquiries, city officials said they've been told only that the cable operation is under review, as are all of the business segments of PacTel.
Charter Communications Inc. president Jerry Kent said he is not convinced that SBC is serious about digital wireless cable. His company just bet against that prospect in a way, closing a deal to buy a cable system in Long Beach, Calif., from Kohlberg Kravis & Roberts.
SBC executives "have never been alternative-technology enthusiasts," Kent said. SBC chairman Edward E. Whitacre Jr. is very bottom-line-oriented, and he may not be willing to absorb the start-up's inevitable losses for long, Kent added.
On the other hand, the Los Angeles market's coverage potential and other attributes might make it ripe for a digital wireless success, Kent noted. (Charter has first-hand experience, getting bloodied for a while by Cross Country Wireless Inc., the Riverside, Calif., firm that PacTel bought in 1995 for $175 million.)
Kent said Charter plans to add advanced services to the 750-megahertz Long Beach system in order to compete against "virtually anything that PacTel can offer."
William Deatherage, a telecommunications analyst at Bear Stearns & Co., said he was surprised that SBC had even considered not launching the wireless system after the infrastructure was already in place (and partly underwritten by Bell Atlantic and Nynex).
As for the reports last week that AT&T and SBC were engaged in merger talks, Deatherage said it was clear that AT&T has concluded that it lacks the size to compete against the entrenched local phone companies. Clearly, such a merger would pose a dilemma for regulators, though, and add to the late-stage negotiations over control and valuation issues.
"Even with discussions that are relatively well-advanced, the prospect that they'd actually make an announcement of a transaction is probably still no better than 50-50," he said. |
