Craig Birkmaier wrote:
The major difference form the U.S. is that all of these broadcasters contract with third parties to build and operate the transmission infrastructure.
Yes, I've been asking myself whether/why this would make a difference. And also, in reality, this is true even in the US, to a variable and messy extent. For example, one could think of Sinclair as being the third party that provides much of the infrastructure for the Fox, CW, and MNT OTA networks (I believe that list is right).
But still, bottom line, why would the UK, Aussie, Italian, French broadcasters *not* demand some percentage of the cable subscription revenues when they deal with cable delivery? As they do here? Why would not a third party by-subscription infrastructure offer broadcasters more revenues than a Freeview infrastructure, in Europe and Australia?
The only reason I can think of is that there are laws to forbid such kickback behavior. It just seems so obvious that cable systems would look to make their edge more significant over the Freeview alternative, by making special deals with the broadcasters. "I give you x% of subscription revenues for Channel n if you promise not to ever make it available over a Freeview multiplex."
While trying to figure out exactly who owns the UK infrastructure, I also noticed that the entire infrastructure is being updated between 2008 and 1010 for high powered DTT transmissions.
See? You can't fool mother nature.If you want to offer HDTV, without going to untenable infrastructure designs or massive reduction in program streams, you need to increase spectral efficiency. If you increase spectral efficiency, you pay a penalty in C/N margin required. The practical solution that works here is the same practical solution that works there. (I just couldn't let that one slide by unnoticed -- sorry.)
We just saw the BSkyB announcement,
I assume you mean the one about introducing a terrestrial pay-TV network. I saw that but didn't post it, mostly because it sounds too much like deja vu all over again.
The one and, so far, only demonstrable advantage of OTA TV delivery is that it can afford to be "free," thanks to the very efficient nature of its delivery medium (not to mention that govts all over have allocated spectrum to it). Take away that advantage, and whether your name is Sky, USDTV, ONdigital, or Quiero, you struggle. (Not saying that it's impossible for someone to finally come up with some clever scheme, of course. But one would expect it to be different from what was tried before.)
Bert _________________________________________________________________Search for grocery stores. Find gratitude. Turn a simple search into something more. http://click4thecause.live.com/search/charity/default.aspx?source=hmemtagline_gratitude&FORM=WLMTAG
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.