[opendtv] Re: White paper from CEA
- From: "Dale Kelly" <dalekelly@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 16:05:45 -0800
Craig wrote:
>Can you provide a factual report about this incident. Can you
>identify the broadcast who actually was running promotional
>announcements?
It was the San Francisco area PBS station that turned off it's analog signal
after promoting the change to DTV only operation for several months.
They lost approximately 35% of viewers and reported this particular incident
in a press release.
-----Original Message-----
From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
Behalf Of Craig Birkmaier
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 4:58 AM
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [opendtv] Re: White paper from CEA
At 9:43 PM -0800 10/30/05, Tony Neece wrote:
>The simple fact is that the broadcasters did at first promote DTT. Then
>along came the controversy over changing to COFDM. That caused =
>everything
>to come to a halt.
Rubbish. The ONLY promotion that was evident in the early years were
the announcements at the beginning of a program saying it was
available in HDTV. I have NEVER SEEN a promotional announcement about
DTV broadcasts on the NTSC channel of a station. I know that Sinclair
has been running some announcements in the past year, but I've yet to
see one.
>STB R & D stopped. Sony and others pulled back =
>product
>in the pipeline as well as support for HD broadcast production.
Not true.
R&D increased with heightened interest in companies like NxtWave and
anyone else who could show improved reception.
Sony never pulled back on HD production, nor did the other companies
pushing HD products. They may have pulled a few products with ATSC
receivers, but these were VERY RARE until the FCC receiver mandates
kicked in.
>It =
>looked
>like VHS vs Beta again. With almost no receivers out there it would have
>been asinine for the broadcasters to heavily promote their Digital =
>service.
I guess it was asinine for DirecTVand DISH to promote DBS service
with NO receivers out there?
But they not only promoted the new service, they subsidized the high
cost of the receivers, to get the whole thing off the ground. And did
I mention the huge negative cash flow that both companies endured
while they built these services?
Broadcasters COULD have invested some of their HUGE profits to
promote the DTV transition.
They have not done so; in most cases they have done the minimum to
get their DTV facilities on the air.
>The next step came when the dust settled over the modulation standard, =
>and
>even Nat Osteroff, the most ardent supporter of COFDM, agreed that the
>improved equalizers for ATSC reception made COFDM a dead issue.=20
Remember READ MY LIPS?
Yes, changing the DTV modulation standard in the U.S. is a dead
issue...for now.
Sinclair wants to grow their business, and they strongly believe that
DTV provides significant advantage over analog television. This DOES
NOT mean they think ATSC reception is equal to COFDM. It is simply a
pragmatic way to deal with a problem.
>
>What then happened was that the big retailers told the manufacturers =
>that
>they would be wasting their time to expend R&D on STBs, because the
>retailers had decided it was not in their interest to advertise and sell =
>an
>item that reduced the incentive to buy new TV sets or sign for Cable or =
>DBS.
>It was the retailers that killed the market.
Rubbish. It is not the responsibility of retailers to promote OTA
receivers. That is the responsibility of the broadcasters. If they
would do this, they could create demand, but they are not interested,
and thus the retailers are not interested in supporting something
that even the broadcasters themselves will not promote.
Once again, this has nothing to do with technology. It is all being
driven by business decisions, not technology. it is all about
protecting the NTSC cash cow.
>I read of one retailer =
>that
>actually told a TV station to STOP advising their viewers to get =
>converters,
>because they weren't selling them and didn't want people coming in =
>looking
>for them!!! =20
Can you provide a factual report about this incident. Can you
identify the broadcast who actually was running promotional
announcements?
>
>Oh but how much more fun it is to blame the big bad broadcasters for the
>sluggish transition, despite that for 7 years now they have been =
>spending
>millions upon millions for new transmitters, new STL's, new terminal and
>studio equipment, even new towers in some cases, and a double or triple
>power bill at the transmitter sites. The broadcasters did this =
>willingly,
>even eagerly in most cases. The station personnel dug in to learn
>completely new technology and measurement technique. No small task =
>that.
You are living in a fantasy world. Most of what you wrote above is
simply untrue.
The total expenditures related to the DTV transition for broadcasters
is less than $2 billion, and some of this money was for upgrades that
make NTSC operations more efficient. It is chump change compared to
the $50-70 billion spent by cable for digital upgrades, and the tens
of billions spent by the DBS services to gain a share of the TV
distribution market.
>It is just too much to expect the broadcaster to carry all the load, =
>when
>even now, DTT receivers are few and far between in the hands of viewers.
>Now, really, does anyone truly think the retailers would be eagerly =
>pushing
>DVB-T STBs if we had somehow gone that route?=20
It would be nice if broadcasters would even acknowledge that there is
a transition taking place.
But Tony is correct about one thing. Retailers are not going to
promote something that the industry that is affected is NOT
promoting. All things being equal, a shift to COFDM modulation would
have little effect, unless the broadcasters actually started
promoting it. But it could allow independents, and networks
affiliates that are tired of being abused by the conglomerates to use
their spectrum to offer a Freeview-like service. There is no
incentive to do this today because the ATSC service is too fragile to
support this business model. If you doubt this, just ask USDTV.
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: