Incentive Auction Discussion

[harshness]

ATSC 3.0 isn't something that the FCC is actively contemplating. It is being promoted by some players in the industry (and dismissed by others) and that's about as far as it goes.

The more important issue is that if they don't implement something soon, the repack may prevent doing so in the future as there may not be enough bandwidth to run two incompatible systems.

 

[comfortably_numb]

Doesn't this repack have the ability to really frustrate a lot of OTA users? My DMA doesn't have a single low or high VHF station right now, so many people would be SOL right out of the box if, say, WDAF or KCTV switched to VHF.


Sent from my iPhone using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[harshness]

Doesn't this repack have the ability to really frustrate a lot of OTA users?

That depends on a number of factors.

My DMA doesn't have a single low or high VHF station right now, so many people would be SOL right out of the box if, say, WDAF or KCTV switched to VHF.

Since there are only 16 RF channels in use in the immediate area and 20 UHF channels available, perhaps not. Of course there's also the impact of nearby markets that plays into this and those who live in geographically flat areas need to be concerned.

If the auctions go a third round, it is conceivable that WDAF doesn't have to move (KCTV probably doesn't have to move anyway as they're already under channel 30).

The markets that need to be concerned are the big ones that are using more than 30 RF channels or have nearby neighbors that combine for more than 32 channels.

I think it is folly to suggest that VHF is necessarily a bad thing. My market was 100% VHF until the early 1980s. The problem there is those who were taken in by the "HD antenna" craze or believe that only bay or flat antennas can receive a decent signal.

 

[comfortably_numb]

That depends on a number of factors.Since there are only 16 RF channels in use in the immediate area and 20 UHF channels available, perhaps not. Of course there's also the impact of nearby markets that plays into this and those who live in geographically flat areas need to be concerned.

If the auctions go a third round, it is conceivable that WDAF doesn't have to move (KCTV probably doesn't have to move anyway as they're already under channel 30).

The markets that need to be concerned are the big ones that are using more than 30 RF channels or have nearby neighbors that combine for more than 32 channels.

I think it is folly to suggest that VHF is necessarily a bad thing. My market was 100% VHF until the early 1980s. The problem there is those who were taken in by the "HD antenna" craze or believe that only bay or flat antennas can receive a decent signal.

I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing either, but when I did my antenna survey for my location I bought an antenna with mostly UHF support because we have no VHF stations. Why would I spend more money for something I don't need? My point was, I suspect many of my neighbors did the same thing. So now if channels are forced into VHF, we have to buy new antennas. Also, at 50 miles from downtown, I am also aware that VHF stations don't generally travel as great a distance as UHF. Maybe that wasn't as big of a deal back in the analog days, but it makes a huge difference now. WDAF is a 1000kw station. Right now it comes in at 83% signal quality for me. With a move to VHF I doubt that would be the same. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know.


Sent from my iPhone using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[harshness]

Why would I spend more money for something I don't need?

Because a full-range TV antenna is cheaper and easier than a UHF antenna plus an FM antenna and FM isn't going anywhere soon?

Larger markets often have a VHF station anyway (mine has two VHF-high) and there will likely be some VHF stations pop up in many markets if ATSC 3.0 becomes a thing. If ATSC 3.0 (or better) happens, I predict that there's going to be some serious shuffling to accommodate simulcasting and getting the ATSC 3.0 stations to their final RF frequency.

Perhaps those that were duped will be able to "gut it out" during the transition(s) but based on where things seem to be headed, VHF is becoming more and more a big deal.

 

[Trip]

Because a full-range TV antenna is cheaper and easier than a UHF antenna plus an FM antenna and FM isn't going anywhere soon?

Do most people hook FM receivers up to their roof antennas? I know I don't. I'm actually the only person I know who has an FM receiver in the house that isn't using its own attached antenna, and those are using the included dipoles.

- Trip

 

[comfortably_numb]

Duped? I purchased a really good antenna that was suggested by several experts and electrical engineers to receive the channels available in my market. We have *zero* VHF stations and I don't need FM. I don't believe I was "duped" into anything.


Sent from my iPhone using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[harshness]

Do most people hook FM receivers up to their roof antennas?

In my market, a lot of people do. Most of the FM stations worth listening to are 30-60 miles away (same as most of the TV stations). There are three AM stations and two FM stations (one of the stations plays Mexican "oldies" and the other is public access) within 20 miles. I had to put up an outdoor antenna just to get an AM station that is 8 miles away.

I expect that there are lots of people who DX FM just to get something to listen to.

 

[harshness]

I don't believe I was "duped" into anything.

Yet here you are -- rightly concerned about the possibility of having to "build out" your TV antenna situation.

If simulcasting happens, there is a pretty good chance that at least VHF-high will be used in your market.

 

[DRCars]

... snip ... Also, at 50 miles from downtown, I am also aware that VHF stations don't generally travel as great a distance as UHF. ... snip

Actually, all else being equal, the higher frequencies (UHF) do not propagate as well as the lower (VHF) frequencies. However, given less power for the VHF signals than UHF signals (FCC limits output power of transmitters), you may indeed find that a particular UHF signal may reach further.

DRCars

 

[comfortably_numb]

Yet here you are -- rightly concerned about the possibility of having to "build out" your TV antenna situation.

If simulcasting happens, there is a pretty good chance that at least VHF-high will be used in your market.

Whatever, dude. This is supposed to be a "friendly" and "helpful" forum. You come off as arrogant and know-it-all. My point was, this repack has the potential to frustrate OTA users. It doesn't have anything to do with anybody being duped into anything. If you could leave the attitude out of your posts, maybe I would take you seriously.


Sent from my iPhone using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[navychop]

Both my AVRs are connected to my VHF/UHF antenna.

 

[mrc54]

Both of my FM receivers are hooked up to their own roof top FM antenna.

 

[comfortably_numb]

What is the reception range of ATSC 3.0 going to be? I've seen conflicting information online. Some say range will be increasing, others say decreasing.


Sent from my iPhone using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[harshness]

What is the reception range of ATSC 3.0 going to be? I've seen conflicting information online. Some say range will be increasing, others say decreasing.

There are many, many variables and a relative vacuum of data to make such a call. Some areas are mostly dependent on reach while others are going to be all about interference in a jam-packed spectrum.

As I recall, there are two US stations "experimenting" with ATSC 3.0 (WJW Cleveland and WRAL Raleigh) and one or two demonstrations that have been set up; hardly a statistical sample. The other side of the coin is in the short term and how DTV and ATSC 3.0 might (or might not) coexist.

As for WJW, Rich Chernock of the the ATSC recently commented that there were two receivers that picked up the ATSC 3.0 World Series broadcast: one in the station and one in the feed truck at the stadium. From an interview, "What's up with ATSC 3.0", he did for another forum (highly recommended for a basic understanding of what ATSC 3.0 represents), the ratified standard is still months away.

I was disappointed to learn that the US is going to use Dolby AC4 while most of the rest of the planet is going to use MPEG-H for audio.

Of course ATSC 3.0 is largely off-topic for a thread about the repack auctions outside of the fact that we may be making both transitions more or less at the same time.

 

[harshness]

Well here we are and it is currently round 29 of the stage 3 reverse auction. Is there any chance this is going to bear fruit?

Given how far apart the goal was and what they got in the forward auction (21.5M of 56.6M), it appears that the FCC has found their new cash cow -- perpetual auctions. The more auctions they have, the more they "earn". Didn't someone say it was about $2M per stage?

Stage 3 leaves us with one more RF frequency for OTA TV for a total of 31 channels (2-32) possible.

 

[osu1991]

Maybe they're trying to drag it out as long as the changeover from analog to digital

 

[harshness]

Maybe they're trying to drag it out as long as the changeover from analog to digital

Whatever it is they're doing, it doesn't seem to be in anyone else's best interests in terms of time or money. At some point, the cost of conducting the auctions is going to be a relatively high percentage of the cost that they need to make up for in the forward auction.

 

[navychop]

I hope the whole thing fails. Maybe the cellcos figure with 5G they have enough.

 

[Trip]

The more auctions they have, the more they "earn". Didn't someone say it was about $2M per stage?

?

- Trip