Attempts to curb competition in the TV market do not stop. Globes has learned that Hot and Yes are expected to appear before members of the Second Authority Council at the hearing, which it will hold on Sunday on the subject of the new streaming company FREETV, from Beit Keshet and RGE. Following their expected appearance, FREETV will also appear in the discussion. According to estimates, a professional opinion has already been formulated in the council, but the chairman of the council, Eden Bar-Tal, wants to conduct an orderly and transparent procedure and allow all parties to voice their positions before the official decision is made.
The council may only discuss Keshet’s economic ability to enter into new activity without jeopardizing its financial strength, but Hot and Yes argue the illegality of the venture and seek to expand the discussion to its actual airing.
FREETV guarantees an average saving of NIS 130 per month
Meanwhile, it was learned that this morning FREETV sent an economic opinion to a number of parties dealing with the issue and also to the Ministry of Communications, in which it presents the expected savings to households as a result of its entry into the streaming market. The economic opinion was formulated by Dr. Assaf Eilat, former chief economist at the Competition Authority.
Globes has learned that FREETV claims in the opinion that it is expected to result in savings of NIS 1,000-2,200 per year per household as a result of the move to it. FREETV is expected to be broadcast through an app with a package that costs NIS 40 per month, which will include a long line of content that includes broadcast channels, an extended package of sports channels, children’s content and more.
From the data she presented, it was found that the average package cost today is NIS 170 per month per household, so the savings are estimated at NIS 130 per month, depending on the type of package in each household. For sports spectators, for example, the savings will reach NIS 180 per month.
FREETV claims that its activity challenges the existing equilibrium in the multi-channel television market and allows, for the first time, a dramatic reduction in costs to the consumer using groundbreaking models and technologies. The success of the venture and the establishment of the model on which it rests are expected to increase competition immediately, force existing platforms to reduce prices, and help more competitors enter this market on a similar model.
HOT: The project’s airing is illegal
HOT’s main argument is that FREETV’s entry into the market should be delayed until the new broadcasting law that the Ministry of Communications is currently working on is regulated, following the recommendations of the Folkman Committee. According to Hot, the promotion of the project to broadcasting is illegal because today Keshet is not allowed to operate paid television broadcasts, since the law stipulates that its income should come from advertising.
According to her, the Second Authority Law stipulates that anyone who holds a license for multi-channel TV broadcasts to subscribers (hot and yes) cannot hold a commercial channel. Hot argues that these provisions of the law, which prohibit cross-ownership of major media outlets, are intended to protect the public from the concentration of much media power by a few. The fact that Keshet’s multi-channel television broadcasts will be broadcast on the Internet and not by cable or satellite does not change the purpose of the legislation regarding the need to prevent Keshet from concentrating power.