[opendtv] Re: FCC Eliminates Simulcast Rules
- From: Tom Barry <trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 20:05:41 -0400
Lest everyone forget, ABC-2 already exists as "ABC New sNow", a 24 hour
news sub-channel on digital TV most places.
I sometimes watch it and I hope it succeeds.
- Tom
Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
> Craig Birkmaier wrote:
>
>
>>Most broadcasters could care less, since they
>>understand that OTA DTV is not going to have any
>>real audience impact for many years to come.
>
>
> Broadcasters expecting to stay in business probably
> think beyond the day when NTSC is shut down. This
> transition was never meant to be purely voluntary.
>
>
>>Now, exactly what incentives exist for local
>>broadcasters or the networks to accelerate the day
>>when the NTSC service will be shut off?
>
>
> Where is it written that they have a say in this?
> The transition can happen 1/1/2007, using the rules
> the FCC wrote down in 1996. The question is what
> should broadcasters do after NTSC is shut off, not
> whether or not they would prefer to retain their
> analog channel. And it's going to be Congress and
> consumers that determine when analog gets shut down,
> not broadcasters.
>
>
>>Why SHOULD they use this tool? The networks are
>>NOT ignoring you. They are exploiting you. They
>>can ill afford to lose you as a viewer,
>
>
> Craig, the networks are competing entities. Given
> that all OTA users will soon be on DTT exclusively,
> what do these competing entities do? I mean, as
> their best solution for the FTA sector they serve?
> You have no suggestion for them, other than status
> quo and hope the competing network won't be any
> more imaginative. I'm guessing the networks can do
> better, and I'm betting they've already figured
> this out.
>
> The "exploiting" part is hilarious, BTW.
>
>
>>This was abundantly clear at the recent Emmy's.
>>It looks like the plan is to get people to PAY
>>for the good stuff. The good news is that MOST
>>people are comfortable with this.
>
>
> Apparently, you got that part backwards still.
> The analysis you enthusiastically posted said
> exactly the opposite of what you continue to
> claim. The analysis said that while the Emmys
> might have gone disproportionally to premium
> programs, no one in the viewing audience gave a
> hoot. Because, so said your posted analysis,
> people aren't watching these premium shows!
> They can't relate to shows they never see!
>
> Somehow, some way, you think this supports
> your position?
>
>
>>Yes, it is negotiable. But it means further
>>dilution of the broadcast network audiences.
>
>
> I would expect that an intelligent executive at
> any of the major networks would rather have
> his audience be "diluted" from, say, ABC-1 to
> ABC-2, rather than from ABC to another
> network's multicasts. The ad revenues from ABC
> multicasts still end up in ABC's bank account.
>
> 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:
