Whats Really Holding HD Back? 3

Charlie Hoffpauir wrote:

On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 02:52:53 GMT, common_ wrote:


It would be very nice if it remains free,,

Lots of things would be nice if they were free,,

Facts are though,,its not going to be free after 2009....

Please elaborate on that....

Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/


Basic business economics,,,

Its already happening - the networks are selling their HD feeds to the
cable and sat companies. The are not investing millions to send out
OTA free HD to maybe a 5 percent market share.

HD will become part of the "premium" package, on the "pay" feeds that
over 85 percent of the present TV market receives their TV from.

Only a minute percent of the viewing audience cares a rats AH about HD
- and those will pay to see it.

wrote:

Charlie Hoffpauir wrote:
On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 02:52:53 GMT, common_ wrote:

It would be very nice if it remains free,,

Lots of things would be nice if they were free,,

Facts are though,,its not going to be free after 2009....

Please elaborate on that....

Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/

Please Charlie, don't feed the troll!

Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB

Please post your evidence to the contrary,,,

Not you personal "hobbyist" opinion,,the factual hard data.

"David" wrote:


"Charlie Hoffpauir" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 02:52:53 GMT, common_ wrote:


It would be very nice if it remains free,,

Lots of things would be nice if they were free,,

Facts are though,,its not going to be free after 2009....

Please elaborate on that....

It'll take him awhile to confer with bob.



do not know Bob,,,

but again,,post your evidence to the contrary,,

and not your personal opinion - some hard sceintific facts,,,,,

Gonzo wrote:
"Charlie Hoffpauir" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 13:25:56 GMT, Bob Miller wrote:

snip
Does that mean that 15 million sets were sold to watch DVDs?
Maybe it means that 15 million HD sets were sold to people who are
waiting for more content on OTA or cable or satellite.

Since we know that 15 million HDTV set owners have not even bothered to
hook up an antenna for OTA and that most of the remaining 10 million
have HD from satellite or cable that few, possibly very few have OTA HDTV.

And that even fewer RELY on OTA HDTV.

And that VERY few bought their HDTV because they could not wait to get
home to hook up OTA DTV.

The fact is that the Consumer Electronics Manufacturers made a bad call
and crippled OTA with a garbage modulation for short term profits and
that OTA contributed virtually nothing to those profits.

snip

I can't see how you get your data. I have OTA HDTV, and I love it. Am
I the "only" one who bought a HDTV and receives his content OTA? I
seriously doubt it.

Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/

Same here Charlie,

He forgot to add:

OTA HDTV FOR FREE!!!!!!

The "Free" part is important and a big reason many of us purchased HDTV in
the first place.
To tell the cable and satellite companies AMF!

The word "Free" is a powerful word. Remember when television content was
free? You didn't get a little bill in the mail saying "pay me $50" each
month.

HDTV has the promise of the best of both worlds. Clear modern HD
entertainment and news combined with the free broadcasting of the pre-Cable
monopoly days.

I still think it's possible although the fat cats will fight to keep their
control over the market.


They are winning at the moment. Cable and satellite companies tell
broadcasters not to promote OTA. CEA companies saddle the US with the
worst modulation in the world and then laugh at the broadcasters who now
see what a pickle they are in. Laugh is exactly the correct term. Don't
believe me ask your local broadcaster.

Broadcasters now want to charge cable and satellite companies for their
FREE OTA content. Would lots of people abandoning cable for OTA make
them happy under these circumstances? How? Every new f**k cable OTA
customer is one subscriber fee less for broadcasters.

The guardians of free OTA TV that we gave spectrum to for free. Who you
Congress critter gave Must Carry to for nothing is not a good shepherd
of your sacred free OTA TV.

Americans have been trained to pay twice for cable content. Once in
subscriber fees and once with advertising. Now broadcasters want in on
the action.

Are OTA broadcasters interested in killing the golden goose by promoting
OTA broadcasting? No. They want just enough economically challenged
(read poor people) to use OTA so that it stays alive and they can keep
their MUST CARRY license.

And then they want to collect subscriber fees for each cable and
satellite subscriber who gets their free OTA content via cable and
satellite.

Take away broadcasters Must Carry privileges and you will have a
screaming kicking mass of broadcasters demanding a better modulation and
codec for the US.

More likely Congress scr**s broadcasters and lets OTA continue its slow
downward spiral before calling in the spectrum and selling it to some
other entity that will use it with better modulations and codecs.

After all Congress is scr**ing broadcasters with unlicensed use of their
spectrum by smart radios and by allowing such things as broadband over
power lines which will both cause interference to broadcasters.

Every action Congress has taken for years signals their intent to do
away with OTA broadcasting.

Soon after the analog shutdown and shortly after the feeding frenzy by
cable and satellite over the remaining 13% of viewers who rely on OTA
for their TV someone in Congress is going to notice that the percentage
of viewers that still depend on OTA has shrunk to something under 7% or so.

It won't??? Tell me more. How can it not? Analog shutdown will bring a
host of programs by cable and satellite to get the last remaining
holdouts to buy into cable and satellite.

They will have a major ally in 8-VSB. Million of people who rely on OTA
will find out the problems of OTA with cheap converter boxes and no
rooftop antennas. They will not know what hit them. They will scream in
pain which will attract the interest of politicians.

OTA will die.

Bob Miller

Bob Miller

common_ wrote:
wrote:

Charlie Hoffpauir wrote:
On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 02:52:53 GMT, common_ wrote:

It would be very nice if it remains free,,

Lots of things would be nice if they were free,,

Facts are though,,its not going to be free after 2009....

Please elaborate on that....

Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/

Please Charlie, don't feed the troll!

Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB

Please post your evidence to the contrary,,,

Not you personal "hobbyist" opinion,,the factual hard data.

My evidence that you are a troll? It's pretty obvious, isn't it?

Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB

common_ wrote:
wrote:

Charlie Hoffpauir wrote:
On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 02:52:53 GMT, common_ wrote:

It would be very nice if it remains free,,

Lots of things would be nice if they were free,,

Facts are though,,its not going to be free after 2009....
Please elaborate on that....

Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/
Please Charlie, don't feed the troll!

Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB

Please post your evidence to the contrary,,,

Not you personal "hobbyist" opinion,,the factual hard data.

That's just silly - there is no "factual hard data" on the state of
anything after 2009.

common_ wrote:

Facts are though,,its not going to be free after 2009....

How so?

What's going to happen to OTA?

How will they charge for it?

wrote:
common_ wrote:

Facts are though,,its not going to be free after 2009....

How so?

What's going to happen to OTA?

How will they charge for it?


They can charge for programming delivered with OTA spectrum. USDTV is
doing it now. USDTV charges a subscriber fee just like cable or satellite.

One way of thinking about post 2009 is that if OTA remains a non issue,
few viewers, sort of dormant, broadcasters for political considerations
will just let it alone and do little with it. Maybe farm out some of the
spectrum to USDTV like ventures for some extra cash.

But if OTA shows signs of life broadcasters would begin to count lost
revenue since every cable or satellite customer who decides to go OTA
represents a lost source of cable or satellite subscriber fee income for
the broadcaster. They could decide to charge for that same content
delivered OTA.

The danger of having the number of OTA viewers go to low after 2009 is
that Congress will sell the spectrum out from under them. To many
viewers and they have to start charging.

And then there is the new competition that will be broadcasting OTA
using channels above channel 51. That competition will, IMO, force
broadcasters as market driven profit margin watching, shareholder
reporting concerns to compete.

Which would mean facing up to the garbage modulation and inadequate
codec they are saddled with that the competition is NOT. The competition
will be using the latest codecs and modulations and will be able to
upgrade to the latest as they wish. Broadcasters will want the same.

As those competitors become successful, far more so than say XMRadio or
Sirius, the pressure to address that market will become intense. Say
about spring 2010 you will see all hell break loose.

Broadcasters are paying a lot of attention to A-VSB at the moment hoping
it will allow them to compete with the upstarts. It won't. They will
need more bandwidth to do anything other than deliver a pathetic copy of
their main content. As this sinks in their agitation for a change in
modulation and codec will escalate.

Which may get them what they want or may cause Congress to make good on
their threats of 2000 and begin the process of stripping the spectrum
from broadcasters especially since their inattention to OTA will see the
number of viewers in 2010 at 7% or so.

Either way the OTA DTV spectrum, channels 2-51, will be on the way to
using a better modulation and codec.

Bob Miller

Bob Miller wrote:
wrote:
common_ wrote:

Facts are though,,its not going to be free after 2009....

How so?

What's going to happen to OTA?

How will they charge for it?


They can charge for programming delivered with OTA spectrum. USDTV is
doing it now. USDTV charges a subscriber fee just like cable or satellite.



Bob Miller



And what advantage does USDTV offer for the consumer over cable or
satellite? There is some advantages for the broadcaster (no need to run
cable or launch/lease satellites), offset to some extent by the cost of
putting in new broadcast equipment.

Let's see now... People who currently don't have cable or satellite
because they either aren't interested in additional content or they
don't feel (or actually can't) afford the subscription cost. You really
believe that those same folks are going to buy a new TV or buy or lease
a set top box and pay to get additional content? That's just not logical.

But you'll say that USDTV is going to offer a lot of HD content
unavailable anywhere else. But haven't you been posting that most people
aren't interested in HD and that most people with HD TVs aren't watching
HD?

So... Let me try to summarize your thoughts. According to you, people
aren't watching OTA HD because they:
1. Can't receive it
2. Aren't interested in it
3. Can't afford it

But an alternative modulation scheme would "fix" this because:
1. Local broadcasters could broadcast subscription HD content

Yup, that makes a lot of sense! Except that most people who are
interested in OTA HD already can receive it.

common_ wrote in message
...
"Gonzo" wrote:

"Charlie Hoffpauir" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 13:25:56 GMT, Bob Miller wrote:

snip
Does that mean that 15 million sets were sold to watch DVDs?
Maybe it means that 15 million HD sets were sold to people who are
waiting for more content on OTA or cable or satellite.

Since we know that 15 million HDTV set owners have not even bothered to
hook up an antenna for OTA and that most of the remaining 10 million
have HD from satellite or cable that few, possibly very few have OTA
HDTV.

And that even fewer RELY on OTA HDTV.

And that VERY few bought their HDTV because they could not wait to get
home to hook up OTA DTV.

The fact is that the Consumer Electronics Manufacturers made a bad call
and crippled OTA with a garbage modulation for short term profits and
that OTA contributed virtually nothing to those profits.

snip

I can't see how you get your data. I have OTA HDTV, and I love it. Am
I the "only" one who bought a HDTV and receives his content OTA? I
seriously doubt it.

Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/

Same here Charlie,

He forgot to add:

OTA HDTV FOR FREE!!!!!!

The "Free" part is important and a big reason many of us purchased HDTV in
the first place.
To tell the cable and satellite companies AMF!

The word "Free" is a powerful word. Remember when television content was
free? You didn't get a little bill in the mail saying "pay me $50" each
month.

HDTV has the promise of the best of both worlds. Clear modern HD
entertainment and news combined with the free broadcasting of the
pre-Cable
monopoly days.

I still think it's possible although the fat cats will fight to keep their
control over the market.



It would be very nice if it remains free,,

Lots of things would be nice if they were free,,

Facts are though,,its not going to be free after 2009....

Why is that? I though the whole IDEA behind OTA HD is to bring back free
programming per the Feds?