No more HD Distant Networks?
- Thread starter toghome
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 340
- Views 53K
I said that the same thing the other day. By the way , they are still on here Sunday morning at 8:36am.
at the old saying goes.."there is more than one way to skin a cat"..Charlie prolly found a loop hole the rest of us overlooked..He seems to be able to drive a Mack Truck thru a pin hole and get away with it
The Commission is adopting its proposal to address the statutory change to limit the network stations to be considered in satellite signal delivery eligibility cases to those stations that are located in the same DMA as the satellite subscriber by amending its rules to specify that eligibility determinations are to consider only the signals of network stations located in the subscriber's DMA. The Commission notes that this statutory change will also reduce the burden associated with distant network signal eligibility waiver requests by reducing the number of stations from which a waiver would need to be requested. In addition, this change will reduce the burden of on- site measurement of signal strengths where such tests are performed for the purpose of determining a satellite subscriber's eligibility to receive distant signals.
It really comes down to money. 2 transponders are being used to deliver distants. Dish knows how many subs have distants, how many will lose distants (because they carry their local DMA) under Dish, how many RVers, etc.
Dish will make a business decision based on what makes them the most money with the transponders. If for example they think they will get more subs with more national channels added they will use the space for that. It could be they just drop the HD, or maybe they decided the distants market is juicy enough to offer both HD and SD. I am sure they have been working overtime on it. If the average distants sub that would still qualify (essentially just RVers, not counting fill in short markets) are just AT120 subs that they lose money on, they will drop them quick. If they are subs that order PPV all the time because they are bored on the road, well then it might be a profitable market to cater to.
if Dothan CBS was in HD then yes Dish would import the HD version to Panama City (since your market doesnt have a CBS). But thats the only one they can import
He's speaking of SD locals. The issue is 3 of the 4 stations that are "local" to him are in a retrans dispute with Dish.
CBS (and Fox subchannel) are in a dispute with Dish
ABC is too (probably because they have a CW subchanel too)
So the only locals they get are PBS (which is local) and a imported NBC (WHAG Hagerstown, MD)
So while Dish can tote that they "have all 210 DMA's up" its very questionable considering this market has only one station (a statewide PBS) available. Its like when Dish started doing HD and they said "oh we added 15 HD markets" and 3/4 of the markets only got 1 channel added.
Well that explains it. Retransmission disagreements do make markets have holes in them in regards to network coverage. Lake Charles, Louisiana still doesn't have the Fox station due to a disagreement between Fox KHVP and DISH over $$$.
Dish is not allowed to substitute a distant for a local in dispute. Salisbury MD is just out of luck until a retransmission agreement is reached.
I unfortunately don't read this as solving one major hurdle for the vast majority of us who are in a white area and want distants. (And if you can provide a link I would appreciate it) Are they going to drop the requirement that the satellite provider is not already offering the locals for your DMA to then be able to offer distants if you are in a white area?
My reading of the above is the elimination of worrying about the signal of significantly watched stations that are outside the DMA. It has been even if you are in a white area, for your DMA, if a significantly watched channel from an adjacent DMA claims you, and has a sufficient signal, you still can't get distants. (I know this first hand - years ago a providence station would not allow me to get a distant at first. Finally relented.)
Won't it be something if Dish decided to deliver HD signals over IP paying the copyright and avoiding FCC oversite? Assuming of course the technology exists to spool these networks without using excessive bandwidth and no sputtering.
MikeD-C05 said:
Here in Salisbury it's one of the last remaining markets if not the last that Dish has not gotten our locals up and running either in SD or HD. Direct has them for our area (they just got them in the last several weeks) but Dish doesn't have them for us. I have east and west NBC and Fox SD and still have HD from AD. Our locals are not available through Dish.
Dish needs to figure out a way to deliver HD signals to its boxes over IP, avoiding FCC oversight; my understanding is that as long as they pay copyright fees, they can deliver signals over IP to any household that has high speed internet.
In a myopic world you can believe that enough Dish users are in broadband Internet areas.
I guess the issue that satellite TV started and still services the rural areas of the country that OTA signals as well as no broadband has been lost on many. There is not enough bandwidth in Satellite Internet to even consider watching more than one of two shows a day.
A business model of delivering it HD content via broadband would be a bad, if not fatal decision for Dish.
I guess the issue that satellite TV started and still services the rural areas of the country that OTA signals as well as no broadband has been lost on many. There is not enough bandwidth in Satellite Internet to even consider watching more than one of two shows a day.
A business model of delivering it HD content via broadband would be a bad, if not fatal decision for Dish.
I have a feeling you're onto something. 4 hd stations (NYC) would be a lot easier to deliver "DISH everywhere" via cell phones etc., as opposed to over 1000 stupid affiliates. All is of course speculation, it will be interesting how close we've come to put the pieces together.
Just for the record as you seem not to know the full-time RV world. We are not on an extended camping trip. We live in our RVs full-time. They are our houses. We just change the real estate.
We rely on satellite TV as things like Netflix doesn't work well as we move. We live with satellite Internet or air-card connections with 5GB data limits.
Satellite TV is important to use. For example our 40' house has two 1080p flat screen TVs, a VIP722K, a VIP612, AT250, Ultimate HD, Starz, and DNS. This is typical for full-timers except many of the diesel pusher motorhomes have more TVs. So we are not $1.98 "just AT120 subs."
Also, since we have a lot of investment in our receiving equipment (roof dishes, ground tripods) we are not always threatening to jump ship. We are loyal subscribers.,
It just might be that the HD DNS market comes first and whatever is left, can be used for "sticks and bricks" subs.
Last edited:
I really hate not having a HD feed for Fox from Chicago anymore. Had to watch the Bear's game on the SD Fox feed from NY. While the sports action came through OK the graphics were fuzzy.
Dish doesn't offer the local networks here and I can only receive PBS OTA.
Jim
Dish doesn't offer the local networks here and I can only receive PBS OTA.
Jim
I think mike123abc actually described the probable situation well. He didn't say RV's aren't spending money, just not known how many are getting the minimum, or the maximum. But even if the many are getting the programming you are, I am not sure there are enough of you if Dish has to make a decision as to satellite space. You are far far outnumbered to those that want full time RSN's for instance. If dish feels they are losing subs over that, then that might be what they address. If they feel the money and subs can be had through RV's, then they will work on that.
I have to say, in the world of my Father and Mother in law, an extemely few of their friends have an HD TV in their RV. Not one subscribes to satellite. I admit, I don't have a good idea overall, but I suspect of the small percentage of RV subscribers, an even smaller percentage are clamoring for HD. None of that means I don't wish for you to get the distants, actually I wish everyone could get them if they wanted, but of course being in an RV you usually need them even more.
I have to say, in the world of my Father and Mother in law, an extemely few of their friends have an HD TV in their RV. Not one subscribes to satellite. I admit, I don't have a good idea overall, but I suspect of the small percentage of RV subscribers, an even smaller percentage are clamoring for HD. None of that means I don't wish for you to get the distants, actually I wish everyone could get them if they wanted, but of course being in an RV you usually need them even more.
