31% of Seattle households have HDTV

KING TV in Seattle just reported that 31% of Seattle area household have
HDTV. Of the non-HDTV households, a substantial number (I didn't catch
the exact number) plan to go to HDTV within the next year with the
remainder planning to wait until the analog switch-off. Quite a few of
the holdouts cited an expectation that prices will continue to come down.

The report also stated that sales of new HDTV sets greatly outnumber
non-HDTV and especially analog sets. There are a el cheapo SD ASTC sets
and somewhat more EDTV ATSC sets in the under $400 range, but it was noted
that you could get a CRT or 21-27" LCD HDTV set for under $1000.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Mark Crispin wrote:
KING TV in Seattle just reported that 31% of Seattle area household have
HDTV. Of the non-HDTV households, a substantial number (I didn't catch
the exact number) plan to go to HDTV within the next year with the
remainder planning to wait until the analog switch-off. Quite a few of
the holdouts cited an expectation that prices will continue to come down.

What is "King TV"??

Do you have a cite? 31% seems awfully high to me.

Larry Bud wrote:
Mark Crispin wrote:

KING TV in Seattle just reported that 31% of Seattle area household have
HDTV. Of the non-HDTV households, a substantial number (I didn't catch
the exact number) plan to go to HDTV within the next year with the
remainder planning to wait until the analog switch-off. Quite a few of
the holdouts cited an expectation that prices will continue to come down.


What is "King TV"??

Do you have a cite? 31% seems awfully high to me.

http://www.king5.com

On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Larry Bud wrote:
What is "King TV"??

KING (not King; KING is the call-sign) TV is channel 5 in Seattle, the
local NBC affiliate. They also own a sister station on channel 16, KONG.

Do you have a cite? 31% seems awfully high to me.

Write to KING and see if you can get a transcript of August 20's with
Robert Mak".

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

In article om,
Mark Crispin wrote:

On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Larry Bud wrote:
What is "King TV"??

KING (not King; KING is the call-sign) TV is channel 5 in Seattle, the
local NBC affiliate. They also own a sister station on channel 16, KONG.

Did they intentionally get these call signs? I spit the coffee when I
read the King Kong call signs. LOL.

Mark Crispin wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Larry Bud wrote:
What is "King TV"??

KING (not King; KING is the call-sign) TV is channel 5 in Seattle, the
local NBC affiliate. They also own a sister station on channel 16, KONG.

Do you have a cite? 31% seems awfully high to me.

Write to KING and see if you can get a transcript of August 20's with
Robert Mak".

I looked on their site and found this from Robert Mak

http://www.king5.com/business/storie....7f153600.html

"On February 17, 2009, your old TV set won't be able to get any signal
over the air.

The switch to HDTV has millions of Americans buying new sets already.
Here's the basics on what's available. "

Cripe, he can't even get this right. It's not a switch to HDTV, it's a
switch to digital broadcasting. His 31% number is suspect in my
eyes.

On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Stephen Chu wrote:
KING (not King; KING is the call-sign) TV is channel 5 in Seattle, the
local NBC affiliate. They also own a sister station on channel 16, KONG.
Did they intentionally get these call signs? I spit the coffee when I
read the King Kong call signs. LOL.

The chance of them unintentionally acquiring those call signs is even less
than that of Psycho Bob Miller being right on something.

Seattle is located in King County, Washington, which is probably the
ultimate origin of the KING callsign. It originally was KRSC in 1948 and
was the first TV station north of San Francisco. Less than a year later
it was purchased by the owners of KING-AM/KING-FM and the callsign
changed. After a few affilation swaps, in which KING went between CBS,
NBC, ABC, and even DuMont, KING became NBC for good in 1959.

KONG appeared in 1997, and it definitely was because of King Kong.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Larry Bud wrote:


The switch to HDTV has millions of Americans buying new sets already.
Here's the basics on what's available. "

Cripe, he can't even get this right. It's not a switch to HDTV, it's a
switch to digital broadcasting. His 31% number is suspect in my
eyes.


That technical distinction is lost on most consumers. They see it as a
switch to high definition television. Although that is not the FAA
mandate, that is the practical result that is (and will continue to)
drive consumers to buy new television sets.

I think a journalist reporting on this issue in the mass market cannot
faily be faulted for that characterization of the evolution in broadcast
television.

Sam Spade wrote:


That technical distinction is lost on most consumers. They see it as a
switch to high definition television. Although that is not the FAA
mandate, that is the practical result that is (and will continue to)
drive consumers to buy new television sets.

FCC mandate, that is. ;-)

On 21 Aug 2006 09:33:33 -0700, "Larry Bud"
wrote:


Mark Crispin wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Larry Bud wrote:
What is "King TV"??

KING (not King; KING is the call-sign) TV is channel 5 in Seattle, the
local NBC affiliate. They also own a sister station on channel 16, KONG.

Do you have a cite? 31% seems awfully high to me.

Write to KING and see if you can get a transcript of August 20's with
Robert Mak".

I looked on their site and found this from Robert Mak

http://www.king5.com/business/storie....7f153600.html

"On February 17, 2009, your old TV set won't be able to get any signal
over the air.

The switch to HDTV has millions of Americans buying new sets already.
Here's the basics on what's available. "

Cripe, he can't even get this right. It's not a switch to HDTV, it's a
switch to digital broadcasting. His 31% number is suspect in my
eyes.

I see many published items that muddy the Digital v. HD issue.
The people writing these stories don't understand the difference
between HD and Standard Definition digital. From reading the
item referenced by the link above, it's clear that Robert Mak
doesn't understand it.

Perhaps that 31% includes those who won't be affected due
to current use of cable or satellite service.