What's "significant"? 5%? 10? Most people are going to live within OTA reception distance. Yes, there are folks living in rural areas who must rely on satellite to get their local channels. But I still say they're in the minority. When folks could request waivers, I know there were folks within 5-10 miles of broadcast towers requesting waivers. Folks want "easy" and "cheap". It's easier for them to have Dish (Direct, cableco) provide locals. It's "cheaper" for them (because they don't have to pay for an antenna, splitters, cable, etc) to have the sat/cablecos provide them.
Why do we have to pay for locals with Dish?
- Thread starter mitchflorida
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 170
- Views 15K
I must have been with Dish too long. I remember when Dish customers complained there were no locals. Charlie tried to buy Direct TV in order to gain their local's base which was in place. Then when that failed Charlie announced their push for creating locals nationwide in a progressive roll out. Then we waited with great anticipation to see if our local market was on the Dish list to go active. Ah the good ole days.
Clearly you do not live in a rural area, much less where it is hilly and rugged terrain, and in order to get good OTA reception you need large antennas or towers. I suppose by that way of thinking, since rural populations are in the “minority” we should not have electric power or telephone or broadband internet service, as it costs the telephone companies and power companies more to service a mile with two or three homes than it does a mile with twenty or thirty.
The whole reason that people subscribe to cable TV or DBS is for convenience, and one has to pay for that convenience.
There are many areas out west or in the Appalachians that would never have had TV except for pioneering individuals that devised early cable TV systems back in the 50’s.
I have never been able to find statistics, but I venture to guess that probably a large number of Dish and DirecTV’s subscribers are rural. In fact, when Dish Network was first launched in the mid 90’s that was one of their target markets.
I think it's more accurate to say that people in rural areas are more likely to subscribe to D* or E*, but think about the density of the population in rural areas vs in urban areas. Even if EVERY rural house had satellite service, I'd still say urban customers outnumber them.
When E* (or D*) first started, yes, they targeted the rural markets because they likely had NO access to cable.
I'm honestly not sure what your point is. I'll readily agree folks in "rural" America require satellite to get their programming. I just think they're in the minority. That doesn't mean I think you shouldn't have television, electricity, broadband, or telephone service. I can't find statistics either, but I think a large number of Dish & Direct subscribers are within OTA reception range. This is supposition on both our parts. And yes, when satcos launched, rural America would have been a target market. However, many urbanites have switched because they don't like cable. Once LiL became available, satcos became a viable option for everyone.
I might get 5 extra channels with the local sub-channels. Why should Dish supply the listings for free, and $4 is a trivial sum every month. I would want the antenna to integrate with the Hopper, that is just a matter of software.
So........you would pay $4 NOT to get locals in your package.
yes but save $10-$12 a month of Network Broadcast fees, do the math. Save 8 bucks and get at least 5 more subchannels
My point was, and I probably took your comments wrong, that because rural households are in the “minority”, (15% of the U.S. population, on 72% of the land) we should not matter in your supposition that everybody should get locals OTA. If they can’t then most can, so forget about them. I am sure you didn’t mean for your comments to sound that way. I took them wrong.
That was the reason for the comment about electrification, telephone, etc..
That was the thinking of electric and telephone companies before the new deal, and the reason for the REA.
I was pointing out that not everyone can (in the west and hilly and mountainous areas of the east and south, a great deal) receive OTA stations without a significant cost for a TV antenna, and, that locals via satellite were and are a godsend.
I personally had (still have but don’t use) a 60’ tower antenna that was installed in the early 80’s, in 2009, I spent about $600 to get new antennas, cabling, etc.. installed (I wont climb towers) and I could get good reception about 75 miles from the transmitters in Birmingham, however, that reception varied heavily with the weather, much more so than analog TV. Last year, lighting took that whole system out, and I never used it much anyway, so I just didn’t spend the money again to replace it.
So, your reasoning is technically true, rural areas can, at great lengths get OTA reception.
However, it is WELL worth the $5 or $10 or what ever to get locals via satellite in these areas.
There's a lot of wishful thinking here.
Even if it cost Dish 10 or 20 dollars for locals, they only charge about 6. If they dropped all locals, they'd only reduce the bill by $6, not 10-20.
You don't just throw up an antenna. WHERE the antenna is, in all three dimensions, matters a great deal. As does WHICH antenna. And rotators are sometimes needed.
And I daresay, it is not accurate to say the vast majority of people can get OTA. There's the aforementioned rural customers, and people in mountain or skyscraper shadows, and people with multi-path issues - AND people that live in apartments and condos, many of which will get less than all OTA channels, if any. And folks that will come under pressure from neighbors not to put one up, even though they have the right.
We must guard against wishful thinking. Just because something seems to make sense, doesn't mean all factors have been considered and it does. Especially when it's in our own self interest, our thinking may get a bit cloudy.
Posted Via The FREE SatelliteGuys Reader App using an iPhone.
Even if it cost Dish 10 or 20 dollars for locals, they only charge about 6. If they dropped all locals, they'd only reduce the bill by $6, not 10-20.
You don't just throw up an antenna. WHERE the antenna is, in all three dimensions, matters a great deal. As does WHICH antenna. And rotators are sometimes needed.
And I daresay, it is not accurate to say the vast majority of people can get OTA. There's the aforementioned rural customers, and people in mountain or skyscraper shadows, and people with multi-path issues - AND people that live in apartments and condos, many of which will get less than all OTA channels, if any. And folks that will come under pressure from neighbors not to put one up, even though they have the right.
We must guard against wishful thinking. Just because something seems to make sense, doesn't mean all factors have been considered and it does. Especially when it's in our own self interest, our thinking may get a bit cloudy.
Posted Via The FREE SatelliteGuys Reader App using an iPhone.
A bit cloudy? I think we're dealing with major overcast, even possible thunderstorms with some people's thinking.
If I gave the impression that rural customers don't matter, I apologize. That wasn't my intention.
@navychop, I do believe the vast majority of folks can get OTA reception. Do I have any numbers to back that up? Nope. Can getting OTA be difficult if not impossible depending on location? Yup. Can OTA be easy depending on location? Yup. Will we ever know how many people must rely on satellite for OTA? Nope.
http://www.tvb.org/media/file/TV_Basics.pdf
Look at page 7, you will see that the broadcasts (even the CW) have more people watch a show on them than any cable channel. ESPN is just under the CW in cumulative weekly viewers. This is why they have the pricing power over satellite and cable, and can demand payment from every subscriber. Dish/DIRECTV/Cable know this and there is no way they are going to drop these networks and keep their customers for very long.
Look at page 7, you will see that the broadcasts (even the CW) have more people watch a show on them than any cable channel. ESPN is just under the CW in cumulative weekly viewers. This is why they have the pricing power over satellite and cable, and can demand payment from every subscriber. Dish/DIRECTV/Cable know this and there is no way they are going to drop these networks and keep their customers for very long.
The fact is that cable channels are still a minority of what is watched, local channels comprise the plurality of programming that is watched, not quite 50% but a considerable amount more than watch any one "cable channel", so dropping locals is out of the question, not only for practical purposes, but also for safety and local emergency notification purposes.
What math? You're basing your $10-12 number on what CBS has requested for O&O stations. The real current fees for the "Big 4" in any given market are probably closer to $3-4. What's stopping you from getting locals now? Does the hopper not utilize OTA (I have a 211 and a 612(?))? I have OTA feeding both.
I don't watch or record the satellite signal. So all I pay for is the guide data.
They have pricing power because they got the government to create a local channel monopoly for them. Absent that, we would get that content more efficiently and for less money. Think about it, what company would sanely decide to uplink hundreds and hundreds of local channels offering the same content using expensive satellite bandwidth unless they were forced to by a bunch of crony capitalists using government coercion?
I contend that one of the reasons we are coughing up $100 or more per month is precisely this crazy system put in place by all our helpful friends on K Street and Capitol Hill. And yet here we are arguing over a measly 6 bucks per month. Exactly what they want.
Really? Who's FORCING satcos to provide locals? Their customers are. Satco subscribers greatly increased when LiL happened. There's no law requiring satcos to carry local channels. They do it because it gets them subscribers, which gets them money.
You are also allowed to live in any DMA you choose. You are also allowed to visit a DMA and get their OTA signals anytime you would like. You cannot walk into a McDonalds and ask to order food and have it delivered from a different one. Yes, OTA areas are huge compared to McDonalds' territories. Yes, it is an old distribution model, but it still makes a ton of cash so it is not inclined to change any time soon.
I think it's just time to accept that local channels are included with the price of any pay TV provider. It's best to just not think they you are paying extra for them anymore since it's pointless. I get all of my OTA channels and pay for them on Dish and you don't see me complaining.
Similar threads
Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)
Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Testing the Titanium C140 and C240 5G Filtered BLUE LNBFs- Latest: madmadworld
