There has been increasing industry chatter about the possibility that Sky TV’s near-monopoly could be regulated.
The talk has been stoked by a recent Commerce Commission issues paper on demand for faster broadband, entitled “Content and Willingness to Pay.”
The paper said bundled pay TV services had been a key factor in speeding fast broadband uptake overseas.
The commission said that while many companies had the technology to deliver broadcasts and on-demand viewing over new technology platforms, their success “depends on companies having access to premium content. Currently, most of the rights to this content in New Zealand are held by a small number of market participants.”
In key areas like sport and A-list Hollywood movies, only one participant holds rights, of course: Sky TV.
Sky TV has made its MySky (and pending TVNZ joint venture) igloo boxes fibre-capable, which is good. But with its satellite business bring in fat profits, there’s little motivation for it to hustle along with content-over-fiber – at least at the sought of price that would get households jumping to upgrade from copper.
But … in comments for the print edition of NBR last week, new ICT Minister Amy Adams didn’t seem convinced there was any problem.
“I want to see how the competitive model looks as UFB [Ultrafast Broadband] rolls out and changes the market situation,” Ms Adams said.
“However, at this stage I am satisfied that there is no need for proactive action.”
At the Commerce Commission’s Future Broadband conference today, Ms Adams took a similar line, saying:
The Commission’s papers include a useful discussion of the importance for consumers of premium content – that is broadly speaking, live sport and first-run movies.
While I recognise the value of such content for consumers, and the role it will play in initial domestic uptake, I will signal now that I’m cautious about reaching for regulation as a solution at this stage when it is still too early, in my view, to anticipate how the competitive content market will look in a UFB environment.
Stifling competition
Sky TV boss John Fellet has previous told NBR that new internet platforms that let studios reach audiences over the internet - known as over-the-top technologies - as a potential threat to his company, and as a rationale to why it doesn't hold a near-monopoly position, or power.
Today, Ms Adams took a similar line, telling the audience:
Over the last few years new suppliers of video content have emerged in overseas markets. They have provided over-the-top services in a much more flexible way than traditional subscription and free-to-air broadcasters we are familiar with.
While the innovative services that have been launched in overseas markets are yet to make a significant impact here, I’m concerned that premature government action could in fact stifle innovation in this space.
Users of so-called over-the-top services in New Zealand know that the opposite is the case.
OTT services like the movie and music section of iTunes, and equivalent services run by Microsoft and Sony (not to mention the TVNZ-backed, strangled-at-birth TiVo Caspa) offer great technology (including, with the help of wi-fi, the ability to easily play content on your regular TV).
But compared to, say, iTunes US – which is awash in quality TV shows for download, and tons of recent release moves – the local services offer scarce content. Sky TV’s got content rights tied up. Innovation is stifled right now.
Many platforms, one gatekeeper
Ms Adams told NBR, “Sky has supplied services on other platforms such as TelstraClear cable and Vodafone mobile which have gained traction among consumers, so I expect it would have similar incentives to offer services to providers of services over fibre.”
And Mr Fellet, who has long argued that his company has no special privilege in seeking content rights (and oh that TVNZ and Telecom would team on a proper alternative rather than the half-baked TiVo then falling back into line. Telecom has joined TelstraClear and Vodafone as a Sky TV wholesale partner, giving it the ability to build a MySky clone and funnel SkyTV content through it).
He played that familiar theme to NBR again last week, saying “The rights and the structure of the [content] contracts are no different here than in the US where OTT was invented and is thriving. What is different from the US is our cata caps, speeds and cost of data.”
Yes, our data caps our lousy by developed world standards (thank you for noticing, Mr Fry).
But in terms of multiple platforms, and new ways of delivering content, the key problem is not one of technology. It’s that one gate-keeper controls local rights to all the must-have content.
The National government effectively cleaved Telecom in two by making separation a pre-condition of participating in the $1.35 billion UFB. In many ways, it out-Laboured Labour. But on the demand side, it appears there's little will. Sky TV's charmed, regulation-free run continues.
Labour, MediaWorks bite back
Labour's Clare Curran blasted in with, “Amy Adams is behind the eightball. She refuses to acknowledge what is plainly obvious: as more content becomes available online, the telecommunciations and broadcasting industries are increasingly merging.
“The broadcasting environment has no regulation. This has allowed Sky TV and TVNZ to enter into a joint venture with no regulatory oversight which stifles opportunities for rival broadcasters as well as the prospects of new players entering the market.
“But the real losers are the New Zealand public, who with little choice on offer may face broadband and broadcast plans which are over-priced."
Less predictable - especially given her company's complicated relationship with the govenment - MediaWorks managing director Sussan Turner also offered spiky criticism.
Sky TV had a ''take it or leave it approach'' to licensing out its programming rights one that other countries viewed as ''an abuse of monopoly power," the MediaWorks boss told a panel discusssion.
Rival broadcasters and telcos should be able to purchase programming to which Sky owns broadcasting rights on terms set by regulators, so they could package it up with other programming they sourced themselves to provide competitively-priced alternatives to Sky's service, Ms Turner told a panel discussion (see Tom Pullar-Strecker's report on the fracas here).
Ms Turner would like to see a joint telco-broadcasting regulator. (Currently telecommunications is tightly regulated, pay TV almost entirely unregulated).
Sky TV boss John Fellet reportedly told the same panel that a Netflix-style service would "definitely" come to New Zealand. In fact, a crew from Netflix recently visited, rejecting a local operation on the basis of our lousy data caps. And regardless, Apple's iTunes movie and TV download service, and Microsoft and Sony equivalents are already here - they're just starved of content rights in this part of the world.
Price most important - but with a nasty twist.
Ms Adams told NBR that price would be one of the most important factor's in broadband uptake.
Here, on the face of it, UFB companies face hard yakka.
The commission's Content and Willingness to Pay paper, drawing on Roy Morgan and Nielsen Research, reported three-quarters of small-to-medium businesses were happy with the broadband service they receive today. And most households were not willing to pay more than $5 or $10 more a month for fibre.
Maxine Elliot, chief executive of Ultrafast Fibre, told NBR that was no particular problem for her company. From June, it would offer its Tauranga, Rotorua and Whanganui fibre connections that were around the same price as copper but offered more bundled services (VoIP will be standard with all fibre providers).
But not that it matters, for while remains totally hands-off with pay TV, it's cheerfully interventionist with wholesale fibre pricing.
Specifically, The Telecommunications Amendment Act (2011) - the legislation that set the framework for the UFB – allowed for something called “averaging”, which is progressively kicking in over the next 18 months.
Much vilified by Orcon and other retail ISPs, the provision will allow the dominant Chorus to average the cost of rural and urban copper connections. There many more urban connections, and today they cost less. This means averaging will push up a monthly residential bill by an estimated 20% – providing a robust negative incentive to upgrade from copper to fibre.
Sky TV shares (NZX:SKT) were up 0.79% to $5.10 in midday trading.


Comments and questions
yeah cos theres lots of OTT content providers active in NZ.. wait...
Maybe if the offshore based media companies didn't geofence their content there would be competition
And bite the hand that feeds?
Offshore based media companies would be sacrificing payments for programming rights from TVNZ, Mediaworks and Sky in return for what? Millions of dollars (sic) paid by consumers in an on-demand environment with a proportion going to the retailer (eg iTunes)?
When the collective consumer is willing to spend to pay for each episode of House (or sufficient will pay to offset the lower price that Mediaworks will pay for the broadcast rights) then geofencing will start to break down.
[Lots of people are downloading movies and TV shows not available online in NZ already. The studios should give them a street-legal alternative. The experience of Netflix in the US - which now accounts for more traffic than often-pirated BitTorrent content - shows that given the choice, most will pay for online content - CK]
Given that a fair hunk of Amy's electorate will be serviced by RBI they won’t be able to watch programmes real time anyway, so her decision is no real surprise. I am rapidly losing faith in this Government and its sell your soul and its future to balance the books today approach.
In other words forget any Public Broadcasting environment in Television and production of 'niche public interest' Television in NZL
Sky's business model is dead. The longer they hold on to the gates trying to keep everyone from accessing the content they want unless they buy channels that are not necessary, the faster the slide but have no doubt, the company is dead as a doornail.
it will never get more difficult to copy content and it will only get easier. Sky can't respond to that - it's a matter of a couple of clicks to "pirate" the content or jump through expensive and convoluted hoops to get it through Sky.
game over.
just recently travelling around the world, I found out that many locations are able to access 50 to 100 channels with the top movies channels, serials, mini series for no more than NZ$30/ month via cable TV.
They are doing this because of on-line competition and good regulation whcih allows for cable provider to offer the smae top of the range programmes, including films that are just been launched in DVD format..
Sky here is pitfull: old movies, bad programmes choices, few serials or mini series.
Open it up for more competition.
This is a typical head-in-the-sand approach from the government.
As it will costs most to install fibre at the home there needs to bean incentive for people to uptake the new services.
That incentive of course is content. If Netflix and iTunes can't or don't want to deliver here because the content is locked up by Sky and TVNZ whats the point.
I want choice about what I watch and when I want to watch it and if its available overseas I am quite willing to pay and don't want to wait 6-12mths for Sky's or TVNZ's programming schedule.
The market will not right itself here. Amy Adams needs to do something about this now!
As a subscriber of SKY, I can say more recently they have become a complete rip off, the content has seriously declined over the last year and full of recent repeat after repeat. They have also started increasing commercial advertising.
I'm still paying the same but for content I saw only a month ago plus my viewing is increasingly interupted by commercial advertising.
In my view the commerce commission should be investigating what we are getting for our money.
I've heard rumours that sky are poised to buy mediaworks. Surely regulation would be mandatory if sky end up controlling TV3.
Anyone else having deja-vu to Maurice Williamson's approach to Telecommunications in the 1990's? Weak antitrust laws, no regulation in place, no proper information gathering and no realistic threat of regulation. And yet somehow a wholesale content market is supposed to flourish?
Quite agree with the analogy to Telecom in the 90s. The sooner Sky TV is dismemebered the better. We cannot allow monologies to devolp and worse yet propser.
Sky must be given the credit for bringing real choice in content to NZ in the first place. Sky TV performs a valuable role of aggregating all the demand for specific channels into one place - the channel bundle. It can then cross-subsidies the costs of provision of less popular channels with the revenues raised from more popular ones. If the channels are 'unbundled', then it may be that no-one is prepared to bid for the NZ rights to less popular channels and they will disappear from the local environment (noting that in the internet-enabled world, this means bidding for the rights to cache the content locally to ensure that it is actually able to be watched here - to save having to pay for international transit for every bit watched here and the associated jitter from having it travel over a very long route with highly variable level of congestion on the way (the reason why watching Netflix from NZ - even if you have a US account - is not an easy experience.
The classic economics papers show that bundling of this nature raises total welfare relative to the case of single use. . Web-based models threaten this - if we care about the common good (and not just individual benefits from watching what we want when we want to) - then some restrictions may be necessary.
Sky TV sold is subscriptions based on the premise there was no adverts, this is how it started and it has declined ever since, rapidly in recent times. I personally have cancelled my subscription, the general programming is rubbish, if the basic package was worthy programing then Sky would let itstand on its own merits, and not punish sports fans by compulsory subscription to total rubbish, just for the right to then purchase the sports channels.
Post new comment or question
To share this article, click on a service below