If "E" does provide HD DNS, who will qualify ?

[waltinvt]

Ok, since we're all killing time here waiting / hoping for the big announcment, lets get a thread going about what's likely to be the qualifing senerio for HD DNS. This is of course barring any new rules or clarifications from the FCC about digital white areas.

1. Will it be a contract deal with each network that could mean just about anything's possible - depending on how it's written up.

2. Will subs now getting any analog dns automatically get the respective HD signal if they're subscribed to the HD pak?

3. Will current recipents of analog dns that had to give up their LiLs, have to now give up their analog dns and sub to the LiLs again in order to get the HD DNS ?

4. Will new (digital) waivers have to be applied for to each local afilliate or will all existing waivers automatically be accepted ?

5. Will it just be according to the current analog prediction model until the FCC comes up with a digital specific model ?

 

[Curtis0620]

I would expect it to work just like D*.

 

[BobMurdoch]

Yup. Probably just the O&O markets barring a miracle.

 

[NightRyder]

From what I've read D* will also accept digital waivers if you can get your local stations to grant them. All 4 of my local stations have agreed to give me digital waivers, now if E* can just make them available.... :

NightRyder

 

[bhchan]

will residents in Los Angeles automatically qualify, or just for CBS-HD?

 

[John Kotches]

Which is great for me as far as situations with the O&O stations goes in the STL area Why? The only O&O station in our market is Fox and they have the best OTA reception so there's little benefit. OTOH, if I could get a waver for CBS, I'd be a happy camper.

Best,

 

[lakebum431]

So you guys think that only the O&O digital locals will be offered? I thought there was talk about uplinking the top x number of markets? Is that still true? Also, any idea how many markets might be added?

 

[pdxsam]

I wonder if my motorhome waiver will allow me HD DNS?

 

[BobMurdoch]

Until Mpeg4 gets here there is zero chance for anything more than a handful of markets coming on line (I'm guessing NY and LA first with maybe Chicago and Denver to give them one in each time zone). Bandwidth just isn't there.

 

[jmcgee_jr]

Bah dont you hate living in VT. Hey walt I used the D* HD DNS site and I would qualify for all but CBS where im at. WHich is BS cause CBS isnt even in HD where I am at only out in Adelphia country they dont have OTA as you know. How did DTV come up with that crap LOL

 

[jayn_j]

Until Mpeg4 gets here there is zero chance for anything more than a handful of markets coming on line (I'm guessing NY and LA first with maybe Chicago and Denver to give them one in each time zone). Bandwidth just isn't there.

Boy do I wish for Denver. The HDTV tower just got voted down yet again by the county commissioners, so we are stuch with low power xmit from the studios. I live 50 miles north and get 0 signal from the major players.

However, I thought I read where Dish said their first effort was the top 12 markets, and Denver is only like 17.

 

[M Sparks]

I wish (and not just for selfish reasons) they would take into account more than just the market number.

Specifically, Phoenix is market #14. But the nearly the whole state (except Tucson and Yuma) is in the Phoenix DMA. That means there are hundreds of towns and cities who can't access OTA HD. And the DBS penetration ranges from 40% in the cities with decent cable systems, to 90% in the rural areas.

Meanwhile, in a place like LA, almost every city in the DMA has a good cable system, and a high majority of the population can get OTA-HD.

I'm not saying Phoenix should rank above LA, but it should crack the top 10 as far as markets that could BENEFIT from HD-LIL. Denver should be higher too- it is very similar to the Phoenix market, covering nearly the whole state. (Co Springs=Tucson, and Grand Junction= Yuma).

The only reason Phoenix ranks as low as 14 is because the outlying areas of the DMA aren't as dense. Phoenix itself has a larger population than the cities of DMA's #5-13 with the exception of #10- Houston. (There is some squabbling over Phoenix passing DMA #4- Philadelphia- in Census rankings.) Heck, Phoenix has a SUBURB (Mesa) that's bigger than #9-Atlanta and #12-Tampa.

But the cities that surround places like Atlanta (and drive up their DMA) are perfectly capable of picking up OTA-HD. Meanwhile, the majority (area-wise, not population-wise) of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and other western states have NO OTA-HD, nor HD cable. Seems like that's an easier market to focus on, rather than competing with digital cable in the big cities.

 

[Purogamer]

Everyone who lives in a city beyond #13 will make a similar argument...

I just love how in the year 2005 people are still watching tv by installing antenna's to their houses...Just seems so wrong...

 

[FreddyvsJasonvsAsh]

Where does Las Vegas fit into all of this?

 

[M Sparks]

Everyone who lives in a city beyond #13 will make a similar argument...

Thats true, but some arguments are more valid than others. I would say from #13-#20 all have valid arguments. Or look at San Diego- 7th larget city in the US, but they are DMA #26.

They should look at multiple factors- thats all. Market Rank doesn't tell the whole story, and neither does population. I'm just using Phoenix as an example because it's what I'm familiar with.

If DirecTV is really going to carry hundreds of HD-LIL markets, and DISH can't, it makes sense for DISH to look at demographics.

For example, Miami is DMA #17, and Denver is #18. If I'm Dish and have room for exactly 17 markets, I would pick Denver over Miami. Why? Denver covers the majority of a wealthy state full of detatched home owners who have no access to OTA or good cable. Miami covers a larger number of people, but they are in generally lower income households, living in a densely populated area, living in apartments and condos already hooked to a decent cable system. Miami serves only 7% more households than Denver, but I'm willing to bet Denver has 25%-50% greater DBS penetration, and much lower cable penetration. These are just general assumptions- if I really ran DISH, I'd have access to real hard evidence.

Seattle/Tacoma and Phoenix are #13 and #14, but I'd put either of them ahead of Detroit at #11. It's all about demographics.

 

[DarrellP]

In the past when Dish was adding LIL, they didn't necessarily go by DMA size, they went with which market they felt would bring them the greatest number of subs. I mean, after all, the $ is why they are in business, they don't give a rat's arse whether or not DMA 14 comes online before DMA 35 if DMA 35 brings them more subs.

 

[Barry Erick]

Let's see. In order to do local HD, they have to pick up the signal and eventually uplink. They need a spot to do the pick up.

In this market, I was with DirecTV's survey team a week ago for theirs. They first contacted us a few months ago. Dish network has not approached us as yet. Back in Local In Local surveys, they were active before DirecTV.

 

[SimpleSimon]

Lots of Dish LiLs are direct linked, and for those that are not, most existing OTA pickup sites should be fine.

Ya, ya, right now there's DTV transmitters scattered all over, but that should mostly resolve itself when the analog to digital conversion is complete. In most cases, the existing analog sites are also the best digital sites.

 

[goaliebob99]

as far as a place to uplink... i know where im at echostar just finished an uplink no too long ago. Its just down the street from where i live. If i remember right, its a reginal uplink for this type of stuff and it's a usefull backup too.