[opendtv] Re: STB hunting
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 09:54:57 -0500
At 3:42 PM -0500 1/24/06, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
>Craig Birkmaier wrote:
>
>> First, the number of DBS subscribers in the U.S. is now
>> in excess of 27 million, or nearly 25% of all U.S. homes.
>
>And the latest poll quoted by Mark Schubin said something
>around 22 percent for OTA households. So *roughly* the
>same. And even when DBS was below 20 percent, no one was
>dismissing it as being insignificant.
I am sick and tired of these "polls" stating how many OTA households
there are. If a household has 5 TVs, and only one of them uses an
antenna on occasion to watch an OTA broadcast, it is called an OTA
household in most of these studies. 22% does not reflect reality, as
many of these homes subscribe to cable or DBS.
The OTA audience is NOT insignificant, although the demographics are
considerably different than those of cable and DBS homes. Some may
call them "bottom feeders," although this term certainly does not
apply to Bert. Many are simply not able to afford a subscription
service, and many other simply don't care, choosing NOT to watch TV
at all.
What DOES matter is the trend line for the OTA audience. Bert loves
to use this form of analysis when it suits his purposes, as he just
did trying to explain why there are so many more models of monitors
than integrated receivers. For some reason, however, when the trends
suggest something that runs counter to his "belief system," they are
to be ignored.
The trend for the OTA audience is downward - it has been for two
decades. Less than 15% of U.S. homes rely exclusively on OTA TV
service (this is confirmed by the FCC and multiple studies). A
significant number of studies forecast that the OTA audience will be
below 10% by the end of this decade. AND NONE OF THIS takes into
account other trends, like the rise of the Internet as a video
distribution platform.
Once again, I will remind Bert that I have been working aggressively
for more than a decade to HELP broadcasters create a survivable
business model for terrestrial television broadcasting. The current
ATSC business model is NOT SURVIVABLE!
>
>> 1. The number of U.S. homes that still rely exclusively
>> on the NTSC service is unknown, or at least the numbers
>> that are quoted from different studies are conflicting.
>
>Yes, but the conflicts go from a low of 15 percent to 19
>percent (NAB poll of some time back) to 22 percent. And
>that percentage is *not* going down, as far as we have seen
>in the past 5 years or so.
Not true. There has been a steady decline, although the rate of
decline has been decreasing for the past few years. Bert is caught up
in the numbers games played by special interest groups like the NAB.
I've been looking for years for a well constructed study with a
statistically valid sampling technique. None exist, or at least, none
that have been released to the public.
>
>So again, I'm baffled by the apparent urge to dramatize.
>If DTT is as straightforward to receive as it can be, e.g.
>my example, I see no reason to assume that NTSC households
>would want to get sucked in by anyone else.
Perhaps you are right Bert. You can't suck blood from a stone.
Perhaps we have reached the bottom of the barrel; perhaps we have
reached the limit of a new Shannon's Law:
Perhaps there is a finite limit on the number of people who will pay
for their TV fix.
Then again, perhaps the broadcasters realize that they can make more
money by focusing their attention on the `85% of U.S. homes that DO
pay for TV, than pandering to the other 15%.
>
>Just the facts, Craig, no excessive conjecturing or wishful
>thinking.
Perhaps we are both guilty of a bit of conjecture; but Bert wins
hands down when it comes to wishful thinking.
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts: