At 11:41 AM -0500 2/16/07, John Shutt wrote:
Craig,
However, when it comes to "captive" (again for lack of a better term,
I'm no wordsmith) content such as broadcast network television, you
are dealing equally with a universe populated with brand new equipment
and equipment that is 10 years old. Any change to your broadcast
signal that is not supported by four nines (99.99%) of your audience
is a non-starter.
John
I think the "attitude" expressed here is one of the biggest problems
that broadcasters face if they are to have a future. Broadcasters need
to adapt to a competitive marketplace or be content to be just another
channel on the distribution platforms of competitors. Unfortunately,
with the ability (at least for commercial broadcasters) to receive
compensation for their signals from competitors, there appears to be
little incentive for broadcasters to field a competitive service in the
spectrum.
There is nothing "captive" about the broadcast television audience. If
that were true, then 85% of U.S. homes might not have moved on to
subscription services.
The reality is that broadcasters ARE in the middle of a technology
change that is about to render the vast majority of the installed
receiver base useless (without a STB). The other reality is that hardly
anyone has purchased an ATSC STB, and hardly any of the homes that have
new sets with integrated receivers use them.
Rather than expressing concerns about rendering this small base of
receivers obsolete, perhaps the industry should focus its attention on
WHY consumers are either unaware or disinterested in the broadcast DTV
transition. I think you will find that the vast majority of viewers have
simply given up on OTA TV as it does not deliver what they are looking for.
It is important to note that this has NOTHING to do with the technical
ability of the ATSC standard to deliver high quality TV pictures. It has
everything to do with the content, or lack thereof, that IS delivered,
and the belief among broadcasters that what they have is so important,
or so good, that they can perpetuate a (dying) business model that has
changed little in 60 years.
I think it is time to change your four nines to 14.99% of the audience
(perhaps a higher percentage for PBS affiliates, as a larger portion of
YOUR audience seems to be OTA.
Imagine Aunt Millie's response to the disclaimer "In order to view
this week's episode of '24', your television receiver or Set Top Box
must be capable of decoding the H.268 video format." followed by a "no
signal" message on her screen.
It is highly likely that Aunt Millie cannot receive your DTV broadcasts
today, because you cannot deliver much of the content that she wants to
see, even if both the transmitters and receivers worked perfectly (100%).
Any hope that broadcasters have to survive, must either be related to
the delivery of your signals by others, or a change in business models
that makes OTA broadcasting competitive...
Something that Aunt Millie WANTS!
In another post John continued the thread with:
With OTA broadcast, it's a different story. The channel you're
killing is one of only a few on the air, and one that you used to
watch. There has been a suggestion on this list several years ago
that all broadcasters retain two channels in perpetuity, so that they
can continuously simulcast in the "current" format and the
"replacement" format. By the time the "current" format is turned off,
it is time for the latest and greatest again!
You can forget about the second channel idea - some other competitor is
going to get that spectrum and figure out how to use it to make a
profit, AFTER paying a huge amount of money to gain control of it at
auction.
This FACT alone should be enough to to wake broadcasters up. Why is the
spectrum so valuable to others, when the service we are delivering today
is NOT considered valuable by 85% of the audience?
Continuing with this thread, Bert wrote:
But, you know, there are apparently a lot of cable customers who only
want analog basic cable because they do not want to use the STB provided
by cable company. So this STB aversion is not going to go away just
because someone has a nifty new codec. I think it will be an ongoing
problem. But I agree that the upgrade path does exist.
I think Bert is confusing issues here. The great appeal of analog cable
is that it allows viewers to access the extended basic tier of content
on every set in the home. But a very high percentage of cable homes now
have digital cable and virtually all of these subscribers use STBs, at
least on their primary set. Here's the stats from a September 2006 NCTA
press release:
Digital Television - Nearly 33 million cable customers - about 50
percent of all cable homes - subscribe to digital services, receiving
hundreds of additional channels, a clearer picture, and new interactive
services such as video-on-demand. During the first six months of 2006,
4.4 million customers upgraded to digital cable service while cable
gained 100,000 basic video customers during that time.
Now add the 25 million DBS homes ( many of which use multiple STBs) and
you must conclude that more than half of U.S. homes find that the
services enabled by a STB are valuable enough to put up with the
"bother." I would add that PVRs are growing rapidly as a driver to STBs.
If broadcasters fielded a desirable platform for DTV - as is the case in
the U.K. - it would be quite easy to include new technologies like
H.264, PVR, and data broadcast services. Stations could still broadcast
one legacy standard definition MPEG-2 stream for a few years , and use
the rest of the bits for the new services.
In another post Bert continued down this blind alley:
Take the codec change. I don't think H.264 is as big a deal as some have
said, going from the BBC HDTV experience, but codec X will no doubt come
along that really changes the compression equation. So, after some heavy
public service announcements, broadcasters could stop transmitting HDTV
in MPEG-2 (H.262), and use that freed up capacity for the new codec
stream. Simulcast that way for a time, like Euro DTT is doing for HDTV,
then eventually quit using MPEG-2.
I think you are wrong about this Bert. Not only the BBC, but virtually
ALL European broadcasters see the advantage in moving to H.264. What is
more important, they are now reaching a point in their DTV transitions,
where the addition of H.264 for HDTV content will drive a new cycle of
STB purchases. I suspect that it will take less than five years to get
everyone upgraded, then they can stop using MPEG-2 altogether.
The bottom line, is that it is not too late fro U.S. broadcasters to
come up with a business plan to survive. What we know for certain,
however, is that reliance on the existing capabilities of ATSC receivers
will not provide an adequate foundation for the new business model.
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
