Bob Miller wrote: > If broadcasters multicast OTA in the US now they > easily have the equivalent of Freeview. 10 stations > multicasting in a market can deliver more than 30 > free channels now. Agreed. > The problem is there is no will to compete with > cable instead of depend on it. I keep hearing this, and Craig says it too, but it makes no sense to me. Why can't an OTA broadcaster do both? Compete with and depend on cable at the same time? As broadcasters do elsewhere. There will always be demand for cable, because the spectrum available to it will continue to be far more than what's available OTA. But with more OTA channels available, broadcasters with OTA access can grab a higher percentage of viewing audience than those with cable access only. And too, some viewers might just drop cable if OTA is good enough for them, so these new OTA broadcasters will be covered already. The fact that in certain European countries, OTA use is higher than here is only a difference in degree, I would think. It makes OTA access *more* desirable. That's not the same as saying that in the US OTA access is *undesirable*. > And of course there is the problem of expensive > poor performing receivers in the US. Ocrap. 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.