[opendtv] Re: IEEE Ericsson article on use of LTE for TV

  • From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 13:47:48 -0500

Craig Birkmaier wrote:

> The LTE infrastructure IS two-way. It is NOT weaseling to say that
> the telco return data path can be used by broadcasters to collect user
> information or to request that data be pushed through the Broadcast LTE
> channel. Is is just FACT.

Finally a basis to go on. So, this LTE broadcast TV network two way. It is 
simply another cell network, run by the TV broadcast industry. Fine. Let's go 
with that.

Now, explain to me this: Why on EARTH would a Verizon or an AT&T want to sell 
phones to people that support the frequencies owned by the TV broadcaster(s)?? 
When they, the cellcos, don't make a cent from those streams?? And, if the TV 
spectrum is two-way, as you now assert, the TV broadcasters will be able to 
offer even non-TV-related services that would now compete with the cellcos' 
services. Had the TV spectrum been a one-way broadcast system only, at least 
the cellcos would have a little less to worry about? (Still would compete, but 
to a lesser degree.)

> What you continue to avoid is the reality that none of these standards
> are being supported in the mobile devices consumers are buying by the
> millions.

And what you continue to miss is that this is NOT a technical issue. Those 
portable phones will support whatever the provider networks allow them to 
support! This is in fact no different than it is to allow the phones to support 
ATSC/MH, along with the cellco's own two-way standard. The technical difference 
is easily overcome. The problem is the will to do so, and you have not given 
any credible rationale why cellcos would allow a competing two-way cell network 
on their phones.

> But the logical design of future Broadcast LTE networks will necessarily
> require local spectrum pooling in some for of utility model. Technology
> is not the issue here - the issue is how broadcasters come together to
> develop a viable system that will keep them alive.

Finally. Yes, indeed, some new and different organization will be required, 
because individual broadcasters (and O&Os) cannot be competing against one 
another anymore, while at the same time creating this combined utility. Whether 
they become a coop, or whether one "broadcaster" buys out the others, or what 
have you, is something that will have to be figured out. But the reality is, 
local broadcasters exist primarily to deliver high value content that someone 
else owns. If that role goes to a coop or to a single broadcaster who owns the 
utility, then the local broadcaster's role becomes questionable.

For example, we have in this market affiliates for each of the major networks, 
a single O&O, and one broadcaster, with 12 MHz, that relays content from a set 
of 10 international 24-hour news channels. Some of the TV subchannels are 
"rented out" to other content owners, like ThisTV, Bounce, AntennaTV, RTV. 
There is precious little broadcaster-exclusive content in any of this, aside 
from the local news.

So again, *what* do all of the local broadcasters bring to the table, after 
someone else does the RF transmission job for them?

Oh, I forgot another point. Can you calculate how many towers will be required, 
with 2 Km spacing needed for 3.1 b/s/Hz, to provide coverage to a market like 
DC, NY, LA? It's a simple geometry problem.

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.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. opendtv
  3. Archive
  4. 06-2012