[opendtv] Re: The "real" problem with OFDM in the U.S.
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "OpenDTV (E-mail)" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:54:01 -0500
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
> This may well be true for folks such as yourself, who
> live between Washington DC and Baltimore where the
> markets have huge overlaps. But this is not true when
> the distance between markets is greater, such as New
> York and Philladelphia, where other small markets are
> in between ( i.e. southern New Jersey).
It's even more true. Because you have people living far
from OTA stations, who need to get decent coverage.
Overlapping coverage helps ensure ubiquitous coverage.
Where does someone who lives in Aberdeen, Havre de
Grace, or even Elkton MD get his TV signal from, Craig?
Why should a Baltimore or Philadelphia station owner
NOT want to cover those communities?
> But you can't have it both ways Bert. Either you
> protect markets or you don't, and broadcasters are
> very much in the business of protecting their markets.
> You will not find Philly stations on cable systems in
> New York, and visa versa, unless a station has unique,
> unduplicated content. All of the major network
> affiliates will demand market protection; what's more,
> they will demand protection for any syndicated shows
> that may be carried by independents in other markets.
I think I see the problem. You're thinking backwards
here. The local affiliate wants to "protect" his market
from intrusions from distant affiliates on a local cable
system. BUT this doesn't mean the local affiliate wants
to limit his own area of coverage.
It's like competing for shelf space in a supermarket.
Coke might want to protect its space from Pepsi and
others, sure. But does that mean that Coke wants to
deliberately *reduce* its own shelf space to allow more
room for Pepsi?
Similarly, the Balt OTA station might not want the
Phila affiliate to be carried on Baltimore cable
systems, but this sure doesn't mean that Balt
affiliate wants to cut out those far-reaching
communities in Maryland or even Delaware.
That's why OTA transmission infrastructure owned
by the broadcaster is so good. Competition can work.
Each one can maximize its signal to be receivable
by the biggest audience possible, subject to
constraints that are imposed to allow for fair
competition and decent level of service to
communities.
> The only legitimate reason for market overlap is
> historical - there was no easy way to prevent the
> intrusion of signals from distant markets because of
> the use of big high powered sticks. This is no
> longer necessary.
Not at all. Clear channel AM stations, for instance,
had an advantage because at night, they could be
received very far away. It's an ADVANTAGE to the OTA
broadcaster to maximize his *own* coverage, and the
only thing limiting that is FCC regs.
[French DTT]
> No the essence is completely different. They cannot
> afford to waste spectrum, so they have moved to a
> modern, efficient SFN design that uses the spectrum
> efficiently to deliver both regional and local
> services.
Nonsense, Craig. Look at the design before repeating
things that are not supported by the facts.
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.
Other related posts:
