Whats Really Holding HD Back? 3

common_ wrote in message
...
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.

Ah OK. Nope, I think you are way off base and ill informed.
Now I understand why somebody accused you of trolling.

Simply put: The #1 selling point for HDTVs is OTA HD so you have your
numbers backwards.

What you are forgetting is that The Government mandates OTA HD as a
stipulation to have those channels. So NO, they can't sell their HD feeds
to cable because they do not own it. The Amercian public own them.

IIRC the American people have spoken to Congress and told them we are tired
of the cable and satellite monopoly so the Feds are finally taking action.
This is similar to the anti-monopoly busting that went on at the turn of the
century IIRC.

What the Feds are saying is if the networks want Channels for HDTV, then the
price to pay is to provide free OTA HD Content to the public. It's either
that or they can remain SD and become extinct.

wrote in message
...
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't charge for it. Feds won't let them.

This may happen in Canada or elsewhere but not in the U.S.

Destroying the Constitution from within!
"Bob Miller" wrote in message
ink.net...
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

Wrong.

Since everybody here claims to have a crystal ball, let me make my own
prediction.

What is going to happen is that the market will dictate that OTA HD will
rule the day. All parties involved will realize that their payware customer
base is shrinking and that they will need to move to an OTA HD advertisement
based system ASAP or risk going under.

IOW, THE PEOPLE will decide and let the almighty cable and sattelite
monopoly crush themselves with their own weight.

What the Cable and Satellite companies seem to be forgetting is that their
customer base is basically a slave base. We use Cable and Sattelite now
becase WE DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE. We are literally a "Captive Audience".

With the lowering of prices on HD Tuners and TV Sets this will change things
in a major way. The networks that see the writing on the wall will be the
ones that will survive.

Truse me though, there will be lots of network executives and cable company
employees out of work in the next 10 years or so. It will be painfull for
them.

Jeff Shoaf wrote:
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.

Boy you can put a lot of words in someone's mouth.

I am not arguing that USDTV had a good or decent offering. They went
into bankruptcy and back out for one thing. Just pointing out that
broadcasters can charge for OTA content and that it is being done. n
fact I have argued that they were crazy considering the modulation and
codec and that they are basically tenants of broadcasters. Not something
I would want to be.

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.

Your argument not mine. The 15% of TV viewers who rely on OTA TV today
are for the most part the worst demographic to try to establish as a
customer base you can imagine. I surely would not be interested. And I
don't know of anyone who would be. Where did you get this idea?

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?

Again where do you get this information. I never said anything about
what USDTV was going to offer and surely not HD. USDTV so far has been
trying to maximize the number of SD channels they can sell.

So... Let me try to summarize your thoughts. According to you, people
aren't watching OTA HD because they:
1. Can't receive it
Some have tried to receive OTA HD, were unsuccessful and then either
stayed with cable or satellite of went back to it. But again you put
words in my mouth.

I think most people aren't watching OTA HD because no one has told them
about it, few are selling OTA receivers and few are on display, there is
no advertising of OTA receivers. In Costco they have a sign by each
and every HDTV on sale today. It warns you in bold red type that to
receive HD you need either cable or satellite. Costco does not sell any
OTA receiver.

2. Aren't interested in it

If you don't know about it how can you be interested in it. We have been
programmed over the last couple of centuries to respond to advertising.
We are interested in what is sold to us. OTA is not being sold to us
therefore we don't know about it and are not interested in it if that is
what you call not being interested.

Again you put words in my mouth. I don't remember saying that people are
not interested in OTA. In fact I have made MANY MANY observations that
in other countries people are INTENSELY interested in OTA DTV and I have
argued that they would be in the US also if it a working OTA solution
were advertised and sold to them. I have said that the interest in OTA
in the US would have been so intense over the last 7 years that we would
have more than 120 million OTA receivers already sold in the US today.

3. Can't afford it

I don't think to many people have been turned off by the cost of OTA.
Lets see you go into a store today and want OTA DTV. It cost $179 for a
receiver. That is not too much so why not buy it? Well what will I get
if I buy it? The same content I get now OTA but maybe with better
picture quality on my current analog TV but maybe not. Maybe I will be
one of the 30% who will have reception problems that turn me off and I
will return the unit.

So it is sort of a wash. No big incentive to buy a $179 receiver to get
the same stuff I get now. Cost is not the problem. Reason for purchase
is non existent is the problem.

But wait if I also buy a monitor or an integrated set I now get HDTV not
just the same content but much improved picture quality.

Now the subject of cost comes into play. If I can afford an HDTV I can
afford cable or satellite and OTA recedes as a reason to buy. OTA leaves
the equation.


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

NO!! More words in my mouth. An alternate modulation, a far better one,
would bring a hundred manufacturers of receivers in the form of HDTV
sets, STB's and hand held mobile and portable devices to the US market.

The alternate modulation would "fix" the problem of retailers not being
interested in OTA. They would be swamped with profit making inexpensive
receivers that would be heavily advertised and flogged like crazy. This
advertising would do a lot of educating of the public about the benefits
of OTA broadcasting.

The alternate modulation and codec would "fix" the reception problems
and expand the market 10 fold to include mobile and portable reception.
The new codec would expand the ability of the 6 MHz DTV channel to
deliver at least twice the content at the same or better quality
compared to the current MPEG2 codec.

If this had happened in 2000 you already would have a number of OTA
receivers in your home and in your car, boat and a couple of portable
ones you can take anywhere you go.

Local broadcasters would have wrestled with the question of free or
subscription or PPV and all the above would be offered. The funny thing
is that I believe that "FREE" might be the most profitable option. I see
most channels being free with lots of PPV content being delivered in the
middle of the night and some specials during the day as PPV.


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


WOW! That is the biggest OTA killing statement I have ever heard anyone
say. With an OTA penetration of maybe 1 to 2.3% IMO you say that's it.
"Most" everyone who will ever want OTA already has it???

Incredible! OTA is already dead.

Bob Miller

Gonzo wrote:
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?


The "Feds" only require that a broadcaster deliver ONE SD (standard
definition) program for free in their 6 MHz DTV channel. There is NO
requirement for HD. They can do whatever they want with the rest of the
channel.

If they are careful and only deliver a talking head in B&W or a weather
and traffic update screen, they can minimize the bits they waste on this
required SD MPEG2 program and deliver HD or SD for cash using MPEG4.
Something all current receivers can't handle.

The whole idea behind the DTV transition is to give the broadcasters as
much room to make money with the free spectrum we gave them while
letting Congress sell off as many TV channel, 52 thru 69, for as much
cash as possible. Congress really likes money they can get that they
don't have to pass tax increases for.

HD was the promise that the broadcasters and Congress used to sell the
rip off to you and me.

In the meantime broadcasters have spent most of their time and money
working feverishly to get must carry of MULTICAST mandated by the FCC or
passed as law by Congress.

Right now they are losing that fight. But it should instruct us that
broadcasters are VERY interested in delivering something other than HD
with their 6 MHz channels.

Why else are they so intensely lobbying for it? Why is this their main
focus?

For their new fight for MULTICAST must carry they have changed their
strategy. They have renamed it to the "anti stripping" agenda.

http://www.tvtechnology.com/pages/s.0082/t.473.html

Read it and weep.

Do a Goggle on the subject and weep some more.

Maybe that will work. But it all points to more programs and less
resolution, read less HDTV.

Bob Miller

On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 15:56:42 +0000, 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.

This has absolutely nothing to do with free OTA broadcast. They broadcast
encrypted content which requires a decoder box to view. That they they use
the ATSC spetrum means nothing other than they use OTA ATSC instead of
cable or sat. The same was done with NTSC many years ago (which also
failed). It has absolutely no beariing on the subject of free OTA TV. And
also, they are not broadcasting HDTV, only SD.

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.

OTA is just another means of delivery like cable and sat. If the local
stations haven't charged for their broadcast with the tremendous influx of
cable and sat, what makes you think they would start now, or anytime soon?
And logistics would make it almost impossible for them to compete an a
local basis. Each station would have to encrypt their broadcast and
provide a seperate TSB to decode it. Not practical by any means

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.


Just plain fud.

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.

More fud.

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.

And now back to your real agenda of putting down 8VSB. Get over it. You
lost. Nothing you do will help you get your way.

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.

That'll be the celebration here when you quit posting your crap.

Deleted rest of off topic crap.

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
HD Tivo S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm

Gonzo wrote:
common_ wrote in message
...
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.

Ah OK. Nope, I think you are way off base and ill informed.
Now I understand why somebody accused you of trolling.

Simply put: The #1 selling point for HDTVs is OTA HD so you have your
numbers backwards.

The number one selling point for HDTV's is DVD's. 60% of those who have
purchase an HDTV so far do not have any kind of HD service including OTA.

What you are forgetting is that The Government mandates OTA HD as a
stipulation to have those channels. So NO, they can't sell their HD feeds
to cable because they do not own it. The Amercian public own them.

The government does not mandate HDTV. There is no requirement for HD at all.

IIRC the American people have spoken to Congress and told them we are tired
of the cable and satellite monopoly so the Feds are finally taking action.
This is similar to the anti-monopoly busting that went on at the turn of the
century IIRC.

The only actions Congress is taking are those to help cable and
satellite companies consolidate their duopoly, hogtie OTA broadcasters
with a lousy modulation and inefficient codec while letting cable and
satellite use whatever they want, let new unlicensed users interfere at
random with OTA signals with not so smart radios, let power companies
leek interference from power line broadband broadcast that will
interfere with OTA broadcasting.

Let anyone and anything interfere with broadcasters OTA spectrum while
denying they the best tools available while letting their competitors
use them.

Some actions they are taking. Many think it is a concerted attack on
free OTA so that they can sell it off after the DTV transition.

What the Feds are saying is if the networks want Channels for HDTV, then the
price to pay is to provide free OTA HD Content to the public. It's either
that or they can remain SD and become extinct.

Not saying anything of the kind. They loaned broadcaster channels to get
the DTV transition going, not the HDTV transition going and they will
take those channel back in early 2009.

Broadcasters in the meantime have been doing everything they can so that
they can do MORE not less SD programming and they can ram it down the
throats of cable and satellite.

Congress and the FCC so far have denied broadcasters this. They are no
friends of broadcasters these days.

Nothing you have said here is true AFAIK.

Bob Miller

Gonzo wrote:
wrote in message
...
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't charge for it. Feds won't let them.

This may happen in Canada or elsewhere but not in the U.S.


They are already doing it. The "Fed" specifically let them do it. It is
the law. They have to pay 5% of revenues for all subscription services.

Read all about it.

http://www.usdtv.com/

Bob Miller

Gonzo wrote:
Destroying the Constitution from within!
"Bob Miller" wrote in message
ink.net...
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

Wrong.

Since everybody here claims to have a crystal ball, let me make my own
prediction.

What is going to happen is that the market will dictate that OTA HD will
rule the day. All parties involved will realize that their payware customer
base is shrinking and that they will need to move to an OTA HD advertisement
based system ASAP or risk going under.

IOW, THE PEOPLE will decide and let the almighty cable and sattelite
monopoly crush themselves with their own weight.

What the Cable and Satellite companies seem to be forgetting is that their
customer base is basically a slave base. We use Cable and Sattelite now
becase WE DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE. We are literally a "Captive Audience".

With the lowering of prices on HD Tuners and TV Sets this will change things
in a major way. The networks that see the writing on the wall will be the
ones that will survive.

Truse me though, there will be lots of network executives and cable company
employees out of work in the next 10 years or so. It will be painfull for
them.


Well I agree with you here but it will not happen until we change our
modulation and codec.

And it will not happen until OTA sinks to 7% of viewers or so.

We have been at this OTA transition for 9 years and nothing has
happened. Why do you think that all of a sudden this will change?

It will change when the transition actually happens. Screams of pain and
outrage will bring change. But it will not be the one you outline above.
It will either be a change in modulation and codec with current
broadcaster in place or it will be the sale of their spectrum to others
who will use the spectrum with a better modulation and codec.

Bob Miller

Bob Miller wrote:

They can charge for programming delivered with OTA spectrum.

So by what mechanism over analog off air?

Are you saying that digital OTA can be
'controlled"..... but analog OTA can not due to tech
natures?