DOCSLIB.ORG

FCC-13-99A1 Rcd.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
FCC-13-99A1 Rcd.Pdf Federal Communications Commission FCC 13-99 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in ) MB Docket No. 12-203 the Market for the Delivery of Video Programming ) FIFTEENTH REPORT Adopted: July 19, 2013 Released: July 22, 2013 By the Commission: Acting Chairwoman Clyburn and Commissioners Rosenworcel and Pai issuing separate statements. TABLE OF CONTENTS Heading Paragraph # I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................................... 1 II. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................ 12 A. Scope of the Report........................................................................................................................ 12 B. Analytic Framework ...................................................................................................................... 14 C. Data Sources .................................................................................................................................. 15 III. PROVIDERS OF DELIVERED VIDEO PROGRAMMING.............................................................. 17 A. Multichannel Video Programming Distributors ............................................................................ 17 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 17 2. MVPD Structure...................................................................................................................... 21 a. Cable, DBS, Telephone, and Other Providers .................................................................. 22 b. Horizontal Concentration.................................................................................................. 34 c. Vertical Integration........................................................................................................... 38 d. Entry Conditions............................................................................................................... 40 (i) Regulatory Conditions Influencing Entry .................................................................. 41 (ii) Market Conditions Influencing Entry......................................................................... 68 e. Recent Entry and Exit ....................................................................................................... 74 3. MVPD Conduct....................................................................................................................... 79 a. Price Rivalry ..................................................................................................................... 80 b. Non-Price Rivalry............................................................................................................. 84 c. Business Models and Competitive Strategies of Select MVPDs...................................... 95 (i) Cable MVPD Business Models and Competitive Strategies...................................... 96 (ii) DBS MVPD Business Models and Competitive Strategies ..................................... 110 (iii) Telephone MVPD Business Models and Competitive Strategies ............................ 118 4. MVPD Performance.............................................................................................................. 125 a. Video Programming Pricing ........................................................................................... 126 b. Video Subscribers and Penetration ................................................................................. 128 c. Revenue .......................................................................................................................... 136 d. Investment....................................................................................................................... 141 e. Profitability..................................................................................................................... 142 10496 Federal Communications Commission FCC 13-99 B. Broadcast Television Stations...................................................................................................... 145 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 145 2. Broadcast Television Industry Structure ............................................................................... 148 a. Horizontal Concentration................................................................................................ 155 b. Vertical Integration......................................................................................................... 161 c. Entry and Exit Conditions............................................................................................... 166 (i) Regulatory Conditions.............................................................................................. 167 (ii) Non-regulatory Conditions....................................................................................... 171 (iii) Recent Entry and Exit............................................................................................... 174 3. Broadcast Television Industry Conduct ................................................................................ 176 a. Price Rivalry ................................................................................................................... 177 b. Non-Price Rivalry........................................................................................................... 182 4. Broadcast Television Industry Performance ......................................................................... 193 a. Audiences........................................................................................................................ 197 b. Revenue .......................................................................................................................... 201 c. Profitability..................................................................................................................... 214 d. Investment and Innovation.............................................................................................. 217 C. Online Video Distributors............................................................................................................ 219 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 219 2. OVD Structure....................................................................................................................... 223 a. Horizontal Concentration and Vertical Integration......................................................... 243 b. Conditions Affecting Entry and Exit .............................................................................. 245 (i) Regulatory Conditions.............................................................................................. 246 (ii) Non-regulatory Conditions....................................................................................... 251 c. Recent Entry and Exit..................................................................................................... 263 3. OVD Conduct........................................................................................................................ 269 a. Business Models and Competitive Strategies of Select OVDs....................................... 270 b. Non-Price Rivalry........................................................................................................... 276 4. OVD Performance................................................................................................................. 292 a. OVD Viewership and Subscribership............................................................................. 293 b. Revenue .......................................................................................................................... 297 c. Investment....................................................................................................................... 303 d. Profitability..................................................................................................................... 309 5. Consumer Behavior............................................................................................................... 310 IV. COMPARISON OF COMPETITION: RURAL VERSUS URBAN AREAS.................................. 320 A. MVPDs ........................................................................................................................................ 322 B. Broadcast Television Stations...................................................................................................... 327 C. OVDs ........................................................................................................................................... 328 V. KEY INDUSTRY INPUTS................................................................................................................ 329 A. Content Creation and Aggregation of Video Programming ........................................................ 329 1. Overview ..............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pay TV in Australia Markets and Mergers
    Pay TV in Australia Markets and Mergers Cento Veljanovski CASE ASSOCIATES Current Issues June 1999 Published by the Institute of Public Affairs ©1999 by Cento Veljanovski and Institute of Public Affairs Limited. All rights reserved. First published 1999 by Institute of Public Affairs Limited (Incorporated in the ACT)␣ A.C.N.␣ 008 627 727 Head Office: Level 2, 410 Collins Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia Phone: (03) 9600 4744 Fax: (03) 9602 4989 Email: [email protected] Website: www.ipa.org.au Veljanovski, Cento G. Pay TV in Australia: markets and mergers Bibliography ISBN 0 909536␣ 64␣ 3 1.␣ Competition—Australia.␣ 2.␣ Subscription television— Government policy—Australia.␣ 3.␣ Consolidation and merger of corporations—Government policy—Australia.␣ 4.␣ Trade regulation—Australia.␣ I.␣ Title.␣ (Series: Current Issues (Institute of Public Affairs (Australia))). 384.5550994 Opinions expressed by the author are not necessarily endorsed by the Institute of Public Affairs. Printed by Impact Print, 69–79 Fallon Street, Brunswick, Victoria 3056 Contents Preface v The Author vi Glossary vii Chapter One: Introduction 1 Chapter Two: The Pay TV Picture 9 More Choice and Diversity 9 Packaging and Pricing 10 Delivery 12 The Operators 13 Chapter Three: A Brief History 15 The Beginning 15 Satellite TV 19 The Race to Cable 20 Programming 22 The Battle with FTA Television 23 Pay TV Finances 24 Chapter Four: A Model of Dynamic Competition 27 The Basics 27 Competition and Programme Costs 28 Programming Choice 30 Competitive Pay TV Systems 31 Facilities-based
    [Show full text]
  • Media Ownership Chart
    In 1983, 50 corporations controlled the vast majority of all news media in the U.S. At the time, Ben Bagdikian was called "alarmist" for pointing this out in his book, The Media Monopoly . In his 4th edition, published in 1992, he wrote "in the U.S., fewer than two dozen of these extraordinary creatures own and operate 90% of the mass media" -- controlling almost all of America's newspapers, magazines, TV and radio stations, books, records, movies, videos, wire services and photo agencies. He predicted then that eventually this number would fall to about half a dozen companies. This was greeted with skepticism at the time. When the 6th edition of The Media Monopoly was published in 2000, the number had fallen to six. Since then, there have been more mergers and the scope has expanded to include new media like the Internet market. More than 1 in 4 Internet users in the U.S. now log in with AOL Time-Warner, the world's largest media corporation. In 2004, Bagdikian's revised and expanded book, The New Media Monopoly , shows that only 5 huge corporations -- Time Warner, Disney, Murdoch's News Corporation, Bertelsmann of Germany, and Viacom (formerly CBS) -- now control most of the media industry in the U.S. General Electric's NBC is a close sixth. Who Controls the Media? Parent General Electric Time Warner The Walt Viacom News Company Disney Co. Corporation $100.5 billion $26.8 billion $18.9 billion 1998 revenues 1998 revenues $23 billion 1998 revenues $13 billion 1998 revenues 1998 revenues Background GE/NBC's ranks No.
    [Show full text]
  • Media Nations 2019
    Media nations: UK 2019 Published 7 August 2019 Overview This is Ofcom’s second annual Media Nations report. It reviews key trends in the television and online video sectors as well as the radio and other audio sectors. Accompanying this narrative report is an interactive report which includes an extensive range of data. There are also separate reports for Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. The Media Nations report is a reference publication for industry, policy makers, academics and consumers. This year’s publication is particularly important as it provides evidence to inform discussions around the future of public service broadcasting, supporting the nationwide forum which Ofcom launched in July 2019: Small Screen: Big Debate. We publish this report to support our regulatory goal to research markets and to remain at the forefront of technological understanding. It addresses the requirement to undertake and make public our consumer research (as set out in Sections 14 and 15 of the Communications Act 2003). It also meets the requirements on Ofcom under Section 358 of the Communications Act 2003 to publish an annual factual and statistical report on the TV and radio sector. This year we have structured the findings into four chapters. • The total video chapter looks at trends across all types of video including traditional broadcast TV, video-on-demand services and online video. • In the second chapter, we take a deeper look at public service broadcasting and some wider aspects of broadcast TV. • The third chapter is about online video. This is where we examine in greater depth subscription video on demand and YouTube.
    [Show full text]
  • Radio and Television Correspondents' Galleries
    RADIO AND TELEVISION CORRESPONDENTS’ GALLERIES* SENATE RADIO AND TELEVISION GALLERY The Capitol, Room S–325, 224–6421 Director.—Michael Mastrian Deputy Director.—Jane Ruyle Senior Media Coordinator.—Michael Lawrence Media Coordinator.—Sara Robertson HOUSE RADIO AND TELEVISION GALLERY The Capitol, Room H–321, 225–5214 Director.—Tina Tate Deputy Director.—Olga Ramirez Kornacki Assistant for Administrative Operations.—Gail Davis Assistant for Technical Operations.—Andy Elias Assistants: Gerald Rupert, Kimberly Oates EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE RADIO AND TELEVISION CORRESPONDENTS’ GALLERIES Joe Johns, NBC News, Chair Jerry Bodlander, Associated Press Radio Bob Fuss, CBS News Edward O’Keefe, ABC News Dave McConnell, WTOP Radio Richard Tillery, The Washington Bureau David Wellna, NPR News RULES GOVERNING RADIO AND TELEVISION CORRESPONDENTS’ GALLERIES 1. Persons desiring admission to the Radio and Television Galleries of Congress shall make application to the Speaker, as required by Rule 34 of the House of Representatives, as amended, and to the Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate, as required by Rule 33, as amended, for the regulation of Senate wing of the Capitol. Applicants shall state in writing the names of all radio stations, television stations, systems, or news-gathering organizations by which they are employed and what other occupation or employment they may have, if any. Applicants shall further declare that they are not engaged in the prosecution of claims or the promotion of legislation pending before Congress, the Departments, or the independent agencies, and that they will not become so employed without resigning from the galleries. They shall further declare that they are not employed in any legislative or executive department or independent agency of the Government, or by any foreign government or representative thereof; that they are not engaged in any lobbying activities; that they *Information is based on data furnished and edited by each respective gallery.
    [Show full text]
  • The Welfare Effects of Vertical Integration in Multichannel Television Markets
    The copyright to this article is held by the Econometric Society, http:// www.econometricsociety.org/. It may be downloaded, printed and reproduced only for personal or classroom use. Absolutely no downloading or copying may be done for, or on behalf of, any for-profit commercial firm or for other commercial purpose without the explicit permission of the Econometric Society. All other permission requests or questions (including commercial purposes or on behalf of any for-profit entity) should be addressed to: Wiley Permissions www.wiley.com/go/rightslicensing Then select Copyright & Permissions For requests for any content not containing a ‘request permission’ link please contact [email protected]. Econometrica, Vol. 86, No. 3 (May, 2018), 891–954 THE WELFARE EFFECTS OF VERTICAL INTEGRATION IN MULTICHANNEL TELEVISION MARKETS GREGORY S. CRAWFORD Department of Economics, University of Zurich ROBIN S. LEE Department of Economics, Harvard University MICHAEL D. WHINSTON Department of Economics and Sloan School of Management, MIT ALI YURUKOGLU Graduate School of Business, Stanford University We investigate the welfare effects of vertical integration of regional sports networks (RSNs) with programming distributors in U.S. multichannel television markets. Verti- cal integration can enhance efficiency by reducing double marginalization and increas- ing carriage of channels, but can also harm welfare due to foreclosure and incentives to raise rivals’ costs. We estimate a structural model of viewership, subscription, dis- tributor pricing, and affiliate fee bargaining using a rich data set on the U.S. cable and satellite television industry (2000–2010). We use these estimates to analyze the impact of simulated vertical mergers and divestitures of RSNs on competition and welfare, and examine the efficacy of regulatory policies introduced by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Jeffrey A. Campbell Senior Director, Technology and Trade Policy CISCO SYSTEMS, INC
    Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, DC 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Video Device Competition ) MB Docket No. 10-91 ) Implementation of Section 304 of the ) Telecommunications Act of 1996 ) ) Commercial Availability of Navigation ) CS Docket No. 97-80 Devices ) ) Compatibility Between Cable Systems and ) PP Docket No. 00-67 Consumer Electronics Equipment ) REPLY COMMENTS OF CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. Jeffrey A. Campbell Senior Director, Technology and Trade Policy CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Suite 250 Washington, D.C. 20004 202.354.2920 August 12, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................... ii I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 II. THE RECORD DOES NOT SUPPORT IMPOSING AN ALLVID REGIME AT THIS TIME......................................................................................................................... 2 A. Commenters Have Demonstrated that AllVid is Unnecessary............................... 2 B. The Record Shows That AllVid Will Stifle Innovation, Harm Consumers, and be Obsolete On or Before Deployment............................................................ 4 III. IF THE COMMISSION ADOPTS ALLVID, IT MUST AFFORD MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY TO MANUFACTURERS IN ORDER TO PROMOTE COMPETITION AND INNOVATION IN VIDEO DELIVERY.................................... 11 A. “Common Reliance” Is
    [Show full text]
  • Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 Application of Comcast Corporation, General Electric Company
    Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 Application of Comcast Corporation, ) General Electric Company and NBC ) Universal, Inc., for Consent to Assign ) MB Docket No. 10-56 Licenses or Transfer Control of ) Licenses ) COMMENTS AND MERGER CONDITIONS PROPOSED BY ALLIANCE FOR COMMUNICATIONS DEMOCRACY James N. Horwood Gloria Tristani Spiegel & McDiarmid LLP 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 879-4000 June 21, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PEG PROGRAMMING IS ESSENTIAL TO PRESERVING LOCALISM AND DIVERSITY ON BEHALF OF THE COMMUNITY, IS VALUED BY VIEWERS, AND MERITS PROTECTION IN COMMISSION ACTION ON THE COMCAST-NBCU TRANSACTION .2 II. COMCAST CONCEDES THE RELEVANCE OF AND NEED FOR IMPOSING PEG-RELATED CONDITIONS ON THE TRANSFER, BUT THE PEG COMMITMENTS COMCAST PROPOSES ARE INADEQUATE 5 A. PEG Merger Condition No.1: As a condition ofthe Comcast­ NBCU merger, Comcast should be required to make all PEG channels on all ofits cable systems universally available on the basic service tier, in the same format as local broadcast channels, unless the local government specifically agrees otherwise 8 B. PEG Merger Condition No.2: As a merger condition, the Commission should protect PEG channel positions .,.,.,.. ., 10 C. PEG Merger Condition No.3: As a merger condition, the Commission should prohibit discrimination against PEG channels, and ensure that PEG channels will have the same features and functionality, and the same signal quality, as that provided to local broadcast channels .,., ., ..,.,.,.,..,., ., ., .. .,11 D. PEG Merger Condition No.4: As a merger condition, the Commission should require that PEG-related conditions apply to public access, and that all PEG programming is easily accessed on menus and easily and non-discriminatorily accessible on all Comcast platforms ., 12 CONCLUSION 13 EXHIBIT 1 Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Gabriel Mann
    GABRIEL MANN FEATURE FILMS HUMOR ME Danielle Renfrew Behrens, Ruth Pomerance, Emily Blavatnik, Fugitive Films Courtney Potts. Jamie Gordon, prods. Sam Hoffman, dir. TELEVISION SERIES THE MAYOR Jeremy Bronson, Dylan Clark, Daveed Diggs, Scott Stuber, ABC Jamie Tarses, exec prods. Score & Theme Jeremy Bronson, showrunner James Griffiths, dir. ROSEWOOD Marty Bowen, Wyck Godfrey, Todd Harthan, exec. prods. FBC / 20th Century Fox TV Todd Harthan, showrunner Score & Theme Richard Shepard, dir. RECTIFY Melissa Bernstein, Ray McKinnon, Mark Johnson, exec. prods. Sundance Channel / Gran Via Productions Ray McKinnon, showrunner Score Keith Gordon, dir. MODERN FAMILY Steven Levitan, Christopher Lloyd, exec. prods. ABC/ 20th Century Fox Television Jason Winer/Reggie Hudlin, dir. Score 3 CABALLEROS Sarah Finn, dir. Disney Online Co-Score ANGEL FROM HELL Tad Quill, exec. prod. CBS / CBS TV Studios Tad Quill, showrunner Score Don Scardino, dir. DR. KEN Jared Stern, John Davis, John Fox, ABC / Sony Pictures TV Mike Sikowitz, exec. prods. Score Mike Sikowitz, showrunner Scott Ellis, dir. SCHOOL OF ROCK Richard Linklater, Scott Rudin, Jim Armogida, Steve Nickelodeon / Paramount TV Armogida, exec. prods. Score THE CROODS Netflix / Dreamworks Animation Score THE KICKS Elizabeth Allen Rosenbaum, prod /dir. Amazon Studios / Picrow Prods Andrew Orenstein, showrunner Score THE MCCARTHYS Will Gluck, Brian Gallivan, Mike Sikowitz, exec. prods. CBS / Sony Pictures TV Mike Sikowitz, showrunner Score Andy Ackerman, dir. The Gorfaine/Schwartz Agency, Inc. (818) 260-8500 1 GABRIEL MANN MARRY ME David Caspe, Seth Gordon, Jamie Tarses, exec. prod. NBC / Sony Pictures TV David Caspe, showrunners Score Seth Gordon, dir. FRIENDS WITH BETTER LIVES Aaron Kaplan, exec. prod. CBS / 20th Century Fox Television Dana Klein, David Hemingson, showrunners Score & Theme TROPHY WIFE Lee Eisenberg, Emily Halpern, Sarah Haskins, exec.
    [Show full text]
  • Gainesville Channel Lineup & Price List
    TV PHONE INTERNET ADDITIONAL FEATURES COX TV ESSENTIAL $64.29/mo. UNLIMITED EXTENDED MONTHLY SERVICE TV ONLINE Includes: Cox TV Starter ($23.29/mo.) LOCAL CALLING Ultimate (up to 50Mbps x 5 Mbps) ............................$99.99/mo. Watch movies and shows anywhere, anywhen. With Gainesville Primary Line..............................................$13.68/mo. Premierr (up to 28Mbps x 5Mbps)^.............................$64.99/mo. Cox Advanced TV you can watch on your TV...and now COX ADVANCED TV GATEWAY $75.48/mo. Second Line...............................................$13.68/mo. Preferred (up to 18Mbps x 2Mbps)^ ..........................$53.99/mo. online at cox.com/tv at no additional cost. Includes Cox TV Essential, Interactive Program Guide, Essential (up to 3Mbps x 768Kbps)^ ..........................$37.99/mo. Channel Lineup COX TV CONNECT Music Choice, access to On Demand and Pay-Per-View, COX DIGITAL TELEPHONE Starterr (up to 1Mbps x 384Kbps)^..............................$25.99/mo. & Advanced TV Receiver Live TV on your iPad from anywhere in your home! Visit ESSENTIAL $22.99/mo. ^Price requires subscription to Cox TV or Cox Digital Telephone. the Apple App store for more details. & Price List Phone line with Essential Feature Pak which includes COX ADVANCED TV PREFERRED $79.48/mo. Modem purchase or rental required for service. DOCSIS 3.0 Modem recommended for $0.15 per minute Cox Long Distance and the following Ultimate and Premier Service. Uninterrupted or error-free Internet service, or the speed of TV CALLER ID Includes Cox TV Essential, Variety Pak, Bonus Pak, 4 features: your service, is not guaranteed. Actual speeds may vary. See who’s calling – right on your TV screen! FREE for Interactive Program Guide, Music Choice, access to On Cox Advanced TV and Cox Digital Telephone with ∙ Call Waiting ∙ Busy Line Redial Demand and Pay-Per-View, & Advanced TV Receiver Caller ID subscribers.
    [Show full text]
  • March 31 ACMA Eye Pa
    8 March 31 - April 1, 2012 The Weekend Australian Financial Review www.afr.com News Pay TV piracy From `big problem' to `fixable' Porter changes view on severity Austar Key points Angus Grigg @ John Porter and Kim Williams lobbied to make pay TV piracy a specific criminal offence. Austar chief executive John Porter conceded on Friday piracy in the @ On Friday, Mr Porter said such pay TV industry was a major issue piracy was `not an endemic and may have cost his company long-term problem'. up to $17 million in some years. ªYeah, look, it is a big number,º Cottle as a threat to any NDS he told the Weekend Financial systems but without disturbing his Review. ªI acknowledge that piracy other hacking activities (as much was a significant problem but as possible),º Ms Gutman wrote. there is always a fix.º ªWe do not want Cottle in jail Mr Porter's comments come until he has a successor for the after The Australian Financial Irdeto hack.º Review published a series of Austar was one of Irdeto's main articles during the week detailing clients in Australia. Mr Porter how a News Corp subsidiary, NDS, would not comment on the email promoted a global wave of pay TV except to say: ªAvigail what's-her- piracy in the late 1990s. name was maybe a little too Austar and its smartcard excitable.º provider, Irdeto, were two of NDS's He also argued that it was in main targets. ªnobody's interestº to have the On Friday, Austar shareholders Irdeto platform hacked, as it had voted in favour of a takeover by also provided services to Foxtel's Foxtel, cementing its dominance satellite customers.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Annual Disclosure Statements
    ATMC - PRIVACY INFORMATION programming, and related purposes. Aggregate information that does not identify you may be collected and used for As a customer of ATMC, you are entitled to know what we programming, advertising and similar purposes. When we do with personal information that we receive about you. We provide digital video recorder services, we may also receive consider our treatment of such information to be a part of the detailed information concerning your use and operation of the trust you place in us by using our Voice, Video, and Internet recorder for the uses described below in “Use and Sharing.” Services. We provide this notice to better answer questions Internet Services – Like most Internet service providers, we you may have, but our basic privacy policy remains the same. automatically collect certain general information concerning We keep only the personal information of our customers that your use, such as the Internet Protocol (IP) addresses is needed to provide our services, treat it as private, use it only assigned (an identifier assigned to your computer while for what we offer you, do not sell it to others, work to keep it online), bandwidth used, system and connection performance, secure, and destroy it when no longer needed. While we cannot browsers used, dates and times of access, and Internet cover here every situation where your personal information resource requests, including requests to access web pages. may be affected, we have included those we believe are of We do not store online messages sent and received unless left most interest. By law, we tell you annually about our privacy in your ATMC Internet account file.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 Silicon Valley Index
    2014 SILICON VALLEY INDEX People Economy Society Place Governance SILICON VALLEY SILICON VALLEY INSTITUTE for REGIONAL STUDIES SILICON VALLEY JOINT VENTURE SILICON VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS BOARD OF DIRECTORS OFFICERS CHAIR Chris DiGiorgio – Co-Chair, Accenture Thomas J. Friel Hon. Chuck Reed – Co-Chair, City of San José Former chairman and CEO, Heidrick & Struggles International, Inc. Russell Hancock – President & CEO, Joint Venture Silicon Valley VICE CHAIR DIRECTORS Tom Klein Neil Struthers C.S. Park Greenberg Traurig, LLP Santa Clara County Former Chairman and CEO, Maxtor Corp. International, Inc. George Blumenthal Building & Construction Samuel Johnson, Jr. Eduardo Rallo University of California, Matt Mahan DIRECTORS Trades Council Notre Dame de Namur Pacific Community Santa Cruz Causes Inc. Ivonne Montes de Oca Linda Thor University Ventures, LLC Steven Bochner Tom McCalmont Secretary/Treasurer Foothill De-Anza Robert A. Keller Tom Stocky Wilson Sonsini Goodrich McCalmont Engineering Community Leader Community College District JP Morgan Facebook & Rosati Jim McCaughey Jayne Battey Michael Uhl Dan’l Lewin Sanjay Vaswani Ed Cannizzaro Lucile Packard Children’s Miramar Environmental McKinsey & Company Microsoft Center for Corporate KPMG LLP Hospital Inc. and the Miramar Environmental Center Innovation, Inc. Linda Williams David P. López, Ed.D. John Ciacchella Jean McCown Planned Parenthood The National Hispanic Thurman V. White, Jr. Deloitte Consulting LLP Stanford University Emmett D. Carson, Mar Monte Ph.D. University Progress Investment Fred Diaz Dan Miller CEO, Silicon Valley Patricia Williams Anne F. Macdonald Gordon Yamate City of Fremont Juniper Networks Community Foundation Merrill Lynch Frank, Rimerman & Co., Knight Ridder Bank of America Stephan Eberle Curtis Mo Nancy H.
    [Show full text]