[opendtv] Re: 20040712 Mark's Monday Memo

  • From: Bob Miller <bob@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 17:36:28 -0400

Manfredi, Albert E wrote:

>Possibly. These numbers are households rather than TV sets,
>and they assume that anyone connected to cable MUST NOT also
>be connected to DBS. For example, someone who uses cable only
>to get broadband Internet service would be counted as a cable
>household. E.g. my neighbor uses OTA + cable for IP service +
>DBS for the rest of TV channels, so he counts as two separate
>households, both of which use multichannel systems, without
>increasing the number of total households. Interesting!
>
>That table also uses 97M households as the total number,
>but in the back of that same document they claim 108.41M as
>being the actual number. The point the table tries to make is
>that 1/4 of US households uses *other than* cable for TV
>programs, and by the way, the table adds to 100 percent
>without mentioning OTA.
>  
>
97M households are the total number of households in the MVPD universe. 
That is not all the households. The figures quoted add up to 100% 
because they are supposed to. The percentages are of all MVPD segments 
of the universe which totals 97M households and which is 89.483% of all 
US households as presented by the Nielsen figure of 108.4M.

The remainder, 10.52%, represents those NOT part of the MVPD universe.

Then subtract the 2% who have NO TV= 8.52%  and the 6.22% that steal 
from cable and satellite = 2.32%

Yes there are some who are counted by both cable and satellite. How many 
I don't know. 2.32% is a real rough number but it has some truth in it. 
We are very close to absolute ZERO. I would hazard we are at least as 
close as Berlin was and they claimed 5% at the time of their very 
successful DTV transition. They handed out or subsidized 6000 receivers.

>But overall, if I were to believe those numbers without
>looking any closer, I'd say "all the more reason to shut off
>NTSC on 12/31/2006, as originally planned." Never mind any
>purported "redefinition" of the 85 percent rule by the FCC.
>It's not necessary. I'd say shut OTA off, forget about any
>govt assistance for low income households, since there appear
>to be none that can't afford some subscription service, and
>give a revived DTT system a chance. If it fails, yank back
>all the OTA frequencies and auction them off.
>
>(I get about 7.2 percent of households relying on OTA, from
>their numbers adjusted to the 108.41M figure, but that's
>questionable. It'll be interesting to see what the NAB has
>to say to the FCC on this issue, after they finally
>respond.)
>
>Bert
> 
> 
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>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: