[opendtv] Re: San Diego HDTV penetration
- From: Bob Miller <bob@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:55:19 -0400
John Golitsis wrote:
>I've been trying to reconcile Sinclair's new-found interest in HDTV with the
>USDTV concept that you obviously champion. Is it realistic to think that both
>can co-exist? More HDTV equals less USDTV, and vice versa.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Bob Miller" <bob@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>
>>Next year markets like New York will see big increases in DTV reception
>>though not specifically HDTV. I think that a big market like New York or
>>Los Angeles will be be the first to make money for local broadcasters
>>from DTV not (H).
>>
>>
IMO the DTV transition in the US was hijacked by CEA members who did not
trust the free market to give them what they wanted. When you have a
compliant government that will force the market to your wishes why not
use it. They did. But I think the market would have been the better way
to go. LG would have been far better off today and HDTV would be in far
more homes if they had dropped 8-VSB in the summer of 2000 and embraced
COFDM or at least allowed it. They would have sold far more HDTV sets
and Harris would have sold far more full power transmitters.
The extra profit from the HDTV sets sold over the last 5 years would
have been far greater than the IP royalties they lost not selling 8-VSB
receivers. BTW how many 8-VSB receivers have they sold over the last 5
years? How many more HDTV displays with those fat profits would they
have sold if there were inexpensive COFDM HDTV receivers around for the
last five years?
I don't talk to Nat Ostroff. I don't believe however that he ever had
any sinister desire to delay DTV or HDTV. He may have had an opinion
that while HDTV is great, the cost of the display and the reality that
most could not afford a display that would do HDTV justice for a long
time argued for emphasizing the DTV transition not the HDTV transition
and looking at the POSSIBILITY that OTA could be relevant again if we
had a decent digital modulation.
Nat Ostroff was thinking about broadcasting while most broadcasters seem
fixated on must carry. I don't think Sinclair has a "new found interest
in HDTV". I think they have a "new found interest " in OTA broadcasting
which till lately has been rare.
Can USDTV and more HDTV co-exist? I reject that more USDTV = less HDTV
or vice versa. USDTV's plan is similar to what we proposed in 1999. We
never could have imagined proceeding with 8-VSB and MPEG2. Our proposal
was COFDM and VP4 or 5. USDTV's plan before 5th generation and WM9 was
insane IMO.
USDTV with 5th gen and WM9 is now a plan. It is a plan that is driven by
the market. It will deliver as much HDTV as the market demands. IT will
subvert the current FCC plan as much as possible to satisfy the market
as much as possible. If the market demands HDTV USDTV will deliver more
of it than what the FCC and Congress ever expected was possible. How
many 720P signals can fit into a statistically multiplexed channel using
WM9 after you have wasted some spectrum on an SD MPEG2 program? IOW how
do you satisfy the FCC minimal requirement using the least bits?
How bad 8-VSB has been over the last 5 years is only confirmed by how
much better it is with 5th generation receivers.
But to answer your question all good business plans that address the
market with the benefit of a receiver that works will do well and I
happen to think as I have all along that that is very good for HDTV.
But the DTV part will be the first to be profitable and in the bigger
markets IMO. That is a USDTV in Los Angeles next month for instance
unless they delay till they have 5th gen WM9 receivers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
