Who Cares if Analog TV Goes Dark?

[BJ_M]

Moved from News as topic was no longer new - but popular
/Offline

The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) has some news for the 33.6 million of you who use your television (TV) to view over-the-air (OTA) TV programming - get a life, or rather, get a new Digital TV.

Earlier this month, the CEA giddily released data showing that of America's 285 million TVs only 12 percent (33.6 million) are used for watching OTA broadcasts of what the local TV stations in this country call "entertainment". In a further revelation, the CEA's numbers say that approximately 3 million (around 10 percent) aren't used for viewing broadcast television at all. Instead, the electricity gobbled up by these sets is used to play videogames, watch movies on DVD, or view old Jane Fonda exercise tapes. This means that, despite what the clueless techno-pundits in the mainstream newspapers and magazines whine about, it's not likely that there will be riots in the streets or calls for impeachment once the Feds finally decide to put a padlock on the analog TV broadcasting spectrum. (You can put away those visions of a Boston TV Party in which OTA revolutionaries unceremoniously dump Digital TVs into Boston harbor late at night, okay?) The CEA also discovered that more than one-fourth of the technologically-left-behind (TLB) households - those relying solely on OTA broadcasts to get their regular fix of "American Idol" - have at least one TV in the home that isn't used to watch OTA programming at all.

CEA presented the data summarized above in a serious and official-looking letter to the leadership of the Senate and House Commerce Committees. The information was provided purely as a public service to assist the Committees in "their deliberations on how to ensure the needs of all Americans are addressed when analog broadcasting ceases." The House Commerce Committee is getting ready to consider legislation that will set a hard cut-off date for those beloved analog broadcasts that have been with us since RCA first fired up a transmitter for a very limited New York audience in 1939. The Senate Commerce Committee, after letting the rest of the Senate take a much-deserved breather from their fierce filibuster fracas, will release draft (that's draft not daft) digital television legislation later this month.

"Clearly, the vast majority of TVs in the United States are not used to view over-the-air television and we can presume that these numbers will diminish as more and more Americans subscribe to pay TV services, including coming technologies such as TV-over-IP, via telephony and even powerline," said CEA President and CEO Gary Shapiro. "More than 88 percent of today's TVs are connected to cable or satellite service or are used to play videogames, watch pre-recorded content or some other non-broadcast television function."

Neilsen Media Research, the folks who gave us the depressing news that live broadcasts of the Michael Jackson trial verdict on the various networks garnered a 47% share of the available eyeballs, provided some of the information used by the CEA to compile the TV-usage figures. Nielsen says there are 109.7 million U.S. television households, each owning an average of 2.6 TVs. (Another surprising figure was that an average of .6 of TV household remote controls is lost somewhere in the couch.)

The Opinion Research Corporation was hired by the CEA to find out how America's TVs are being used. Of total TV households:

* 60 percent subscribe to cable
* 24 percent subscribe to digital satellite
* 2 percent subscribe to both
* 2 percent do not subscribe to a pay TV service nor use an antenna to receive OTA TV



In related news, the Cable & Satellite Higher Subscription Fee Association released figures claiming that 72 percent of subscribers felt they were paying too little for their monthly programming. 18 percent said they'd gladly pay twice as much if the level of customer service could be lowered. Surprisingly, a full six percent indicated that they'd rather watch TV from cable or satellite than eat or have sex. (The margin of error for the survey is +/- 100 percent.)

[churchie04]

I'm not sure what your source, point, and reason for posting this was.

Especially with a News label.

Feel free to enlighten me.

[edDV]

[quote="BJ_M"]

The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) has some news for the 33.6 million of you who use your television (TV) to view over-the-air (OTA) TV programming - get a life, or rather, get a new Digital TV.

What was the source for this article?

They couldn't get through the lead paragraph without adding to the confusion. Consumers don't need to "get a new Digital TV", they only need to get a new DTV tuner for their existing analog set.

[redwudz]

I think the last paragraph about the"Cable & Satellite Higher Subscription Fee Association" kind of tells the story. Cox cable must be a member.

[BJ_M]

A new bill introduced by Senators John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) entitled the "Spectrum Availability for Emergency-response and Law-enforcement to Improve Vital Emergency Services Act" - otherwise known as "The SAVE LIVES Act" - will, if passed, directly affect the on-going Digital TV transition and the impending analog broadcast cut-off date. The proposed legislation assigns a hard cut-off date of January 1, 2009 - the point in time when the nation's television over-the-air broadcasters will be required to begin using the digital TV spectrum which has been assigned to them and return the spectrum they've been using for analog broadcasts.

Although "The SAVE LIVES Act" seems like an unlikely name for a bill aimed squarely at Digital TV broadcasting, the Act is being proposed in response to the 9-11 Commission's Final Report calling for the "expedited and increased assignment of radio spectrum for public safety purposes." According to a McCain, "Now is the time for Congressional action before another national emergency or crisis takes place. Access to this specific spectrum is essential to our Nation's safety and welfare as emergency communications sent over these frequencies are able to penetrate walls and travel great distances, and can assist multiple jurisdictions in deploying interoperable communications systems."

The bill also addresses consumer education about the Digital TV transition. (Unfortunately, Congress is not mandating that all consumers subscribe to Home Theater Magazine, but it's still a good idea.) McCain said the bill would:

* mandate that warning labels be displayed on analog TVs sold prior to the transition
* require warning language to be displayed at television retailers
* command the distribution at retailers of brochures describing the TV set options that are available
* call on broadcasters to air informational programs to better prepare consumers for the digital transition.

In order to prevent analog-TV owners from finding themselves in the dark after the January 1, 2009 cut-off, the bill includes provisions for digital-to-analog converter boxes to over-the-air viewers who "have a household income that does not exceed 200 percent of the poverty line." (That includes most of the writers I work with...) Cable companies would be allowed to down convert DTV signals "if necessary." Finally, the proposed legislation would establish a tax credit for recycling TVs as well as require the Environmental Protection Agency to report to Congress on the need for a national electronic waste recycling program."

Many in Congress, including Congressman Joe Barton (R-TX), chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and Fred Upton (R-MI), Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, have expressed the belief that proceeds from autioning off parts of the broadcasters' returned spectrum could be used to finance the costs of ensuring a smooth transition from analog to digital, such as providing education and converter boxes, as necessary, for constituents around the country.

McCain's sponsorship of the bill stems in part from his previous stint as chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee and his belief that "broadcast television is a powerful communications tool and important information source for citizens. I know that on 9/11, I learned about the attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon like most Americans - by watching television. Therefore, this bill seeks to not only protect citizens' safety, but also the distribution of broadcast television."

The Federal Communications Committee's original target date for the analog broadcast cut-off was 2006.

[BJ_M]

source for above quotes were http://www.hometheatermag.com/news/

[redwudz]

What's the going price for digital>analog conversion boxes? Seemed when I looked last year they were very expensive. If they came down to the $50US range most people that don't want to move up to digital sets just now could live with it.

[tacoman97x]

Pirate Analog TV stations? I think Yes......

[edDV]

What's the going price for digital>analog conversion boxes? Seemed when I looked last year they were very expensive. If they came down to the $50US range most people that don't want to move up to digital sets just now could live with it.

Today a DTV tuner adds $50-100 to the price of a new TV. A waste for 88% of the people that won't be using it.

Set top DTV tuners that are EDTV and HDTV capable are down to $199 and falling.
http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.gsp?product_id=2598451

I haven't seen the DTV tuners that are designed for analog sets on the market yet but they will probably start around $99 and decline to below $50 before the analog cutoff goes into effect.

[hudsonf]

In related news, the Cable & Satellite Higher Subscription Fee Association released figures claiming that 72 percent of subscribers felt they were paying too little for their monthly programming. 18 percent said they'd gladly pay twice as much if the level of customer service could be lowered. Surprisingly, a full six percent indicated that they'd rather watch TV from cable or satellite than eat or have sex. (The margin of error for the survey is +/- 100 percent.)

They must of surveyed people who have money invested in the cable and satellite companies. If my cable rates go any higher I'm dropping some of my channels. If the studios keep comming up with stupid tv shows I'll drop cable all together and just watch dvds of tv shows and movies I like.

[AlecWest]

The Opinion Research Corporation was hired by the CEA to find out how America's TVs are being used. Of total TV households:

* 60 percent subscribe to cable
* 24 percent subscribe to digital satellite
* 2 percent subscribe to both
* 2 percent do not subscribe to a pay TV service nor use an antenna to receive OTA TV

If my math is correct, that 12% unaccounted for ... and I assume that is the 12% who either have no TV at all or use some kind of antenna. Analog TV will go dark for that 12%. For the rest who still own analog TVs, it just means an extra fee for a converter box. Comcast is already poised to rent them out to analog customers (like me). I suspect other cable entities are similarly poised as are satellite providers.

What was the source for this article?

source for above quotes were http://www.hometheatermag.com/news/

Hmmm ... Home Theater Magazine. I suspect they're a teensy bit biased against analog TV and the people who cling to it.

[lordsmurf]

There also also a LOT of things left out of that number. You may "have satellite" but only on one tv in the main room. Your bedroom and kitchen and garage or basement .... kids rooms ... all those other rooms in the house with a tv, 50-80% of the household, are still antenna, not jacked into the cable or satellite feed.

[edDV]

...

Comcast is already poised to rent them out to analog customers (like me). I suspect other cable entities are similarly poised as are satellite providers.

If analog broadcast went dark, those cable analog channels would still be there. They'd just be patched to the base DTV SDTV channel. This doesn't affect cable customers in any way. So far.

The similar controversy inside the cable industry is how long should bandwidth be "wasted" on those 80 analog channels (80x6MHz = 480 MHz) when everything else including HDTV has to be jammed into the rest of the cable spectrum using digital compression.

Older cable systems are 550MHz total. Newer ones 750-850MHz. analog is eating up over half of that.

If DirecTV and Dish are successful stealing the top paying HDTV customers, expect those analog only cable customers to be downsized to 10 channels in a heartbeat.

I for one would support this.

Analog cable service should be considered a "lifeline". Ten channels would be about right for those unwilling to pay for compressed digital service.


PS for background.

A single analog 6MHz cable channel can contain 6-8 MPeg2 "digital channels" or one ATSC HDTV channel using current Mpeg2 technology.

Cable systems have 3 ways to expand channels.

1. Expand bandwidth by rewiring a city and replacing line amps and set top boxes. ---- This option is very expensive.

2. Convert analog channels to MPeg2 digital gaining 5-7 standard channels or 1-2 HDTV channels per analog channel retired.

3. Convert current MPeg2 "digital" technology to new codecs (VC-1, H.264 or other Mpeg4) to get substantially more standard and HDTV channels into the 750-850MHz RF bandwidth.

DirecTV and Dish are converting to a new "1000 HDTV channels"** MPeg4 service. Cable needs to compete.


**most of the "1000 HDTV channels" will be locals. Individual customers will only get their locals plus 10-60 national HDTV channels

[AlecWest]

Analog cable service should be considered a "lifeline". Ten channels would be about right for those unwilling...

...or unable...

...to pay for compressed digital service.

French Soldier: But, Milady, the peasants have no bread.

Marie Antionette: Then let them eat cake!
(ahem)

[lordsmurf]

Exactly. ALECWEST. This is the rich forcing themselves and their habits onto the poor as far as I'm concerned.

"Oh, you cannot afford tv? I guess you don't deserve it anyway."

[shelbyGT]

I don't pay for TV. With as little as I watch, 7 channels or so is quite enough for me. I get the new, simpsons, seinfeld and family guy. That's all a man really needs!

[edDV]

AlecWest,

Over the air DTV will offer 10-40 channels for "free" so long as you invest $50 or less for a DTV tuner and antenna.

Exception would be the most remote communities that only get 0-6 channels currently.

What I envision for cable is ~10 analog "lifeline channels" for $10/mo. as an alternative for those in the DTV shadow. This will be negociated at the local cable franchise level. For the current franchise cycle nothing will change. Local gov'ts can decide the analog/digital mix in the next cycle.

If you want to fund pay TV for the poor out of your pocket you are free to do so.

[painkiller]

I have yet to see a combination DTV box that supplies decent to excellent video from all sources (OTA, Cable, Cablecard, Satellite, etc.).

And what's more, despite all this analysis going on - only time will tell with the overall reaction from the public.

The pessism in my gut says that Congress is heading for a showdown - over something as "silly" as forcing the public to pay more just to keep their 'babysitter' alive.

[edDV]

I have yet to see a combination DTV box that supplies decent to excellent video from all sources (OTA, Cable, Cablecard, Satellite, etc.).

Are you kidding? The current generation chips are just to the point of getting one of those right per box. Currently OTA DTV, cable and DBS are all on different codecs.

To get what you want would require 3 boxes and $200-$400/mo fees. Or 2 boxes plus a Cablecard HDTV.

[mbellot]

There also also a LOT of things left out of that number. You may "have satellite" but only on one tv in the main room. Your bedroom and kitchen and garage or basement .... kids rooms ... all those other rooms in the house with a tv, 50-80% of the household, are still antenna, not jacked into the cable or satellite feed.

Precisely. Plus there are those of us who feel DirecTV is hosing us by charging extra to get local channels. Even the most basic cable package (if they still exist) includes local channels in the base price.

I have DTV for "premium" channels (whatever the he!! that is supposed to be, it all pretty much looks like junk anymore, but convince my wife of that), but I refuse to cough up an extra $60 a year for something I can get with an antenna.

And thats just the family room TV. The bedroom and kitchen (both less than 2 years old and currently off the air since we just moved in recently) will ONLY get OTA local ANALOG programming. Not to mention the TiVo which records OTA.

Warning stickers and "informational" brochures are NOT enough. If Congress (if con is the opposite of pro then whats the opposite of Progress?) wants to mandate a hard drop dead date then they need to OUTLAW the sale of all analog sets IMMEDIATELY (and just watch what kind of backlash they get from manufacturers ).

[edDV]

There also also a LOT of things left out of that number. You may "have satellite" but only on one tv in the main room. Your bedroom and kitchen and garage or basement .... kids rooms ... all those other rooms in the house with a tv, 50-80% of the household, are still antenna, not jacked into the cable or satellite feed.

Precisely. Plus there are those of us who feel DirecTV is hosing us by charging extra to get local channels. Even the most basic cable package (if they still exist) includes local channels in the base price.

I have DTV for "premium" channels (whatever the he!! that is supposed to be, it all pretty much looks like junk anymore, but convince my wife of that), but I refuse to cough up an extra $60 a year for something I can get with an antenna.

Just drop DirecTV and get basic analog cable for $12/mo or so. You can split to every set in the house and inviduallly tune all the locals without a cablebox. None of that will be affected if OTA goes to digital.

[lordsmurf]

Just drop DirecTV and get basic analog cable for $12/mo or so.

Where? Most places are at least $20-30 a month after taxes just for basic. Many are $40-60 for "basic extended" cable. Want some movie channels? That'll be $80-100+. Excluding "intro offers". I don't know what utopia has $12 cable, but that's not how it works in most places. Cable costs. The only exceptions I know about are some college towns.

Forcing people to dump analog for HD is going to cost $$$ per household, maybe even $$$$ in some cases, regardless of what avenue you choose to take.

And let's NOT forget that house wiring is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY, not theirs. You'll easily spend $100+ to get even the cheapest crappy RG-59 wires to wire your home. Not everybody lives in a brand new "modern" home that comes cable/Internet-ready.

Over the air DTV will offer 10-40 channels for "free" so long as you invest $50 or less for a DTV tuner and antenna.

The price has CONSISTENTLY been shown as being $99 at best, per tv. I really just do not know where you're getting these figures. They are NOT accurate from the info I've seen time and again, including even stuff from a few weeks ago.

.
.

You know, if we "need" to expand emergency response so badly, why don't we just digitally compact THEIR new signals and roll out the system? They'll all have to buy new equipment anyway.

[mbellot]

Just drop DirecTV and get basic analog cable for $12/mo or so. You can split to every set in the house and inviduallly tune all the locals without a cablebox. None of that will be affected if OTA goes to digital.

Sure. Give me your address so I can direct the wife (remember, I said I thought it was junk - others opinions differ) in your direction when her favorite programs disappear.

BTW - A quick perusal of the ComCast website shows no packages under $40. Since I'm paying $38 for DTV that would be an extra $24/yr. Counterproductive (signal is lower quality than DTV) and higher cost? Pass.

Why not just mandate that everyone subscribe to cable and eliminate the digital TV problem altogether? That way there are no airwaves in use, more for the FCC to sell off.

I'm sure the cable companies would back that legislation.

LordSmurf: This has nothing to do (or little anyway) with HD. The "new and improved" Digital TV is still standard definition in most cases. Just one more tidbit in the whole bait and switch process.

[Wile_E]

[quote="hudsonf"]

They must of surveyed people who have money invested in the cable and satellite companies. If my cable rates go any higher I'm dropping some of my channels. If the studios keep comming up with stupid tv shows I'll drop cable all together and just watch dvds of tv shows and movies I like.

I discontinued my digital cable service today. $55 is just too much a month for digital cable. I'm already paying $35 for internet service. This made out to over $100/month(with tax), for both services. TOO MUCH $$$.

Extended Analog Cable in my area is a rip-off $49. This is only $5 less than the Digital Cable I was paying. So what I did, was just get "Basic" analog cable. Only 10 channels, $14 month. I'm renting DVD's or going to the movies for my shows.

[edDV]

Just drop DirecTV and get basic analog cable for $12/mo or so.

Where? Most places are at least $20-30 a month after taxes just for basic. Many are $40-60 for "basic extended" cable. Want some movie channels? That'll be $80-100+. Excluding "intro offers". I don't know what utopia has $12 cable, but that's not how it works in most places. Cable costs. The only exceptions I know about are some college towns.

Well Comcast basic service is up to $13.64/mo. (plus tax) in the greater Sacramento, CA market. Local governments often negotiate even lower "lifeline" rates for certain classes of residents. Here is what you get there. White, light blue and green channels require no cable box.



Local governments take 5-8% off the top as a franchise fee so they generally are not a neutral bystander. They get no taxes from DBS.

[edDV]

...

Over the air DTV will offer 10-40 channels for "free" so long as you invest $50 or less for a DTV tuner and antenna.

The price has CONSISTENTLY been shown as being $99 at best, per tv. I really just do not know where you're getting these figures. They are NOT accurate from the info I've seen time and again, including even stuff from a few weeks ago.

$99 is the additional price a DTV tuner adds to a new TV set today.

Standalone tuners intended for analog TV sets (RF, composite, S-Video and audio out) are not generally available now but will look like a small cable box and be manufactured in the millions. Expect them to be well under $50 by the time analog is shut off.

[edDV]

Here is what is available using DTV subchannels in the Salt Lake, Las Vegas and Albuquerque markets for $20/mo. This package requires the $199 HDTV tuner but discounts are offered in exchange for contracts.

http://www.usdigitalhdtv.com/checkout.php

If this trial catches on, you can expect expanded UHF service using VC-1, H.264 or MPeg4 streams offering dozens of channels including HDTV. This will give cable some well needed price competition.

The ATSC standard allows "data" transmission. These channels can be transmitted as data streams in the multiplex.

[AlecWest]

I think the big winner out of all these upcoming high-tech changes is clear:

PUBLIC LIBRARIES

After cable companies "only-a-few-bucks-more" us into the poorhouse, utilization of libraries and (ahem) books will probably take a sharp rise. This may be especially true if cable prices go up at the same time channel options go down. I'm willing to pay $13 for basic-basic since it gives me roughly 30 channels to choose from. But if that goes down to 10 channels and they still expect me to pay $13, I'll be wearing out my library card much faster than I am now.

[Nilfennasion]

I feel ripped off with free to air TV, so I cannot imagine what it must be like for people in the USA where the mandate to provide at least some free community access TV seems to have gone by the wayside. But then, aside from DTV, I cannot see the need to have a cable.

Alec, you have the right idea. Public libraries would love to be able to say that they are seeing more usage than they currently do. It would enable them to ask for more funds, for one thing.

[edDV]

# channels on basic basic will vary by the number of local stations in the "must carry" class. FCC currently requires these to be carried on basic cable.

In small cities that could be 5-10 channels. In big cities it could be as many as 15+.

Unclear who will win. DBS may take many premium HDTV customers from cable when the MPeg4 conversion is ready. Companies like USDigital may grab many of the "basic digital" customers. SBC wants to deliver video streams over fiber phone lines.

Cable is finally getting the competition it needs.