|
In
all the confabulations around CAS, one assumption that has generally
made is that broadly
speaking the cable fraternity stands
as one. Indiantelevision.com met a group of cable operators, in
Mumbai and point stands out. The "last link" in the cable chain
has an axe to grind not only with the broadcaster and the government
vis-a-vis CAS and other issues, but the big multi-system operators
as well.
The
operators have expressed disappointment over the recent comments
of I&B secretary Pawan Chopra that indicate that the government
might soften its stand on the conditional access system (CAS) deadline
of 14 July 2003. The cable operators also expressed apprehensions
that hesitant government officials who have lacked the will to discipline
broadcasters and multi-system operators (MSOs) are responsible for
the confusion.
indiantelevision.com
spoke to three Mumbai based cable trade constituents (one of them
is also a member of the Shiv Sena, a political party that support
the BJP-led NDA government) and obtained their viewpoints on the
currently ever-more confusing scenario:
Shiv
Sena Vibhag Pramukh and party spokesperson on the issue of the implementation
of conditional access system (CAS) in Mumbai Anil Parab:
Parab
is the proprietor of Dattatray Cable in addition to being a Shiv
Sena party member handling the parliamentary constituency (Bandra
to Jogeshwari). Parab says that the Shiv Sena is not against CAS
but feels that the government and bureaucrats are responsible for
the current confusion. When questioned as to why the Shiv Sena entered
the fray so late; he says that the party officials didn't have access
to all aspects or CAS related issues due to the workings of the
government machinery.
* As
Shiv Sena Pramukh Balasaheb Thackeray had earlier mentioned to information
and broadcasting minister RS Prasad, our main reservations relate
to the hasty way in which CAS is being implemented. We want CAS
to be consumer friendly and the government must ensure that the
cable operator's rights are protected. After all, the cable operator
is the driving force responsible for the success of the cable business
in India.
* Cable
operators must continue to handle the operations they hitherto handled
- billings, collections, maintenance amongst others - post CAS.
This control cannot shift to the MSOs.
* Somehow,
we feel that the government and the bureaucrats have given the wrong
impression to consumers. Through their communication, they have
given an impression that CAS would ensure that consumers would have
to pay less than what they are currently paying. The government
should have specified that consumers should be open to paying amounts
more than Rs 300 in an open market scenario.
* Less than a fortnight away from the CAS deadline, there is no
clarity about the distribution margins that multi-system operators
(MSOs) will offer cable operators. Broadcasters are equally responsible
for the uncertainty as they have not yet revealed the pricing of
individual channels. The government should have forced the broadcasters
to reveal the individual prices by the deadline of mid-June. If
necessary, the government should have gone back to Parliament to
amend the notification that "cable operators have to declare
the prices of pay channels to the consumers." After all, the
NDA government has a majority and can get the appropriate sanctions.
* Why
has the government realised so late that the ground reality indicates
that the MSOs and cable operators are not yet ready even as the
deadline is fast approaching? Some of the MSOs haven't even got
the headends in place; sufficient number of boxes are not available.
* The
government has notified that a fixed rate of Rs 72 will be payable
to cable operators for showing the free to air channels (FTA) but
hasn't passed a law to declare MRPs (maximum retail price) within
which pay broadcasters can operate and charge.
* Nearly
30-40 per cent of Mumbai residents live in slums and own black and
white television sets. They cannot afford to pay the high rates
that broadcasters would continue to charge post-CAS.
* Broadcasters
who say that their "content" is powerful should realise
that the cable operators are responsible for improving the brand
equity of the so called "popular entertainment channels".
The broadcasters should treat the cable operators with due respect.
* The
government's intention is not very clear or firm and this has affected
the smooth roll out.
Sonali Cable proprietor Suvarna G Amonkar:
Amonkar, a distributor of WIN Cable with nearly 200 affiliated
cable operators, is an ardent supporter of CAS. He is in a spot
as the cable operators have several questions and he doesn't have
answers - because neither the broadcasters nor MSOs have taken him
into confidence as yet.
* If
the broadcasters are in favour of CAS, why haven't they announced
the individual rates for pay channels as yet? How can we approach
the consumers when we don't know what the rates are? How can the
broadcasters expect us to announce the rates - what if the broadcasters
decide to change the rates or make certain pay channels free to
air at the last moment.
* The
MSOs must finalise agreements with the cable operators (last mile
operators) and clearly indicate the commissions that will be given
to the LMOs. The MSOs should get 50 per cent of the revenues and
the cable operators should get 50 per cent of the MSO share (25
per cent of total revenues).
* How
can government bureaucrats inform us a fortnight before the CAS
deadline that they had not been briefed about our viewpoints/concerns?
* The
government must give assurances to the LMOs that their interests
- areas of operations, responsibilities, investments in infrastructure
and control rooms - will be safeguarded even post CAS. Perhaps,
the government could give a licence to those cable operators who
have operated in a particular area for years.
* The
government must also direct the broadcasters to share signals with
groups of cable operators who choose to align themselves under a
separate entity - different from the major MSOs who rule the roost
at present.
* Existing
LMOs or cable operators who have operated in a particular area for
years will not surrender their areas to MSOs' dummy operators or
new cable operators (irrespective of the fact that these new cable
operators might bring in better infrastructure or service standards).
* The
cable operators have played a significant role in ensuring the popularity
of channels such as Star Plus or Ten Sports. The sales and distribution
teams of several pay channels used to come to us and make a plea
that we should place their channels in the prime band. We have played
a role in ensuring that the MSO promoted cable channels such as
CCC in Mumbai became popular.
* The
current FTA pricing fixed by the government is insufficient since
the cost of maintenance of a cable network have gone up substantially
and Rs 72 as basic cable fee per subscriber will be inadequate for
the cable operator. Hence, we feel that the government must consider
increasing the FTA charges set by them to an amount higher than
Rs 72 per month.
* The
cable fraternity has bestowed full support to CAS which will bring
in transparency and organisation to the entire industry and also
will benefit subscribers.
* The
cable fraternity does not intend to under declare its
FTA or Pay connectivity to the MSO or to any government body.
* BJP
member of parliament Kirit Somaiya is responsible for spreading
wrong information amongst Mumbai's residents. We have provided proof
to the court that he has been making contradictory statements about
the interim High Court order issued in March; misguiding consumers
by means of an incorrect advertising campaign; declaring that consumers
shouldn't pay more than Rs 150 per month; urging consumers to avoid
buying set top boxes so that broadcasters are forced to convert
pay channel into free to air; while at the same time proclaiming
that he is responsible for the implementation of CAS.
Mumbai
Cable Operators Federation (MCOF) president Nandan Basu
Basu stirred a hornet's nest when his organization raised its
voice against MSOs and backed it up by filing a petition in the
Mumbai High Court. Basu has been drawn into several controversies
and has been at the receiving end of MSOs, broadcasters and rival
cable operator associations. The Mumbai High Court has restrained
Basu's MCOF from disconnecting cable connections of those consumers
who pay 10 per cent more than that of the cable rates applicable
as of 31 December 2002.
* The
government has applied force on the cable operators but has not
pressurised the broadcaster. The broadcasters must be forced to
declare their MRPs immediately and the government must put a cap
on the pay channel rates.
* Due
to the misguided publicity campaign of politicians such as BJP MP
Kirit Somaiya, consumers are refusing to pay monthly charges. We
haven't collected our dues from consumers since the last few months.
The cable operators have been unable to pay MSOs who in turn haven't
paid the broadcasters.
* The
recent comments of bureaucrats indicating that the government might
go "soft" on CAS are uncalled for. There cannot be a soft
CAS - there can be full implementation or no implementation at all.
* If
the government is not rigid about the 14 July deadline, then the
High Court interim ruling that cable operators can charge 10 per
cent more on the cable rates applicable as of 31 December 2002 will
get extended beyond 14 July 2003. Also consumers will refuse to
pay the applicable rates and continue to either pay nothing or pay
Rs 150. After 14 July 2003, the consumer might go a police station
and register a complaint against cable operators using some weird
premises or flimsy excuses.
* It is sad that Mumbai's cable operators didn't get representation
in the CAS task force at an appropriate time so that the government
officials could have got a better understanding of the ground realities.
* The
MSOs haven't taken the LMOs into confidence about various issues
such as pricing of individual pay channels; commissions for the
free to air and pay channels; maintenance costs; division of responsibilities
between the LMOs and the MSOs.
* It
is really sad that the fate of CAS rests on officials of the government
machinery who have very little understanding of ground realities.
I feel that the High Court judges should have devoted more time
to get a better grasp of the various issues.
Also
read:
Mumbai's small cable ops
raise cudgels against MSOs, pay channels
Mumbai
cable operators to seek audience with I&B minister
|
