Why can cable do what DBS is prohibited from?

[MikeSoltis]

The SHVIA renewal talk and the obvious direction the law is headed (to once again stick it to the consumer) brings up a question I've been wondering about.

On cable, I am able to receive stations (network and otherwise) from neighboring markets, even as I receive the 'local' equivalents. For example, my local cable has both the local and Pittsburgh NBC, FOX, and CBS stations. (only the local ABC station, though).

Why is it possible for me to get this on cable, and not DBS?

If the digital equivalents were also available, I would have all the networks available to me in HD (which I need an antenna on my chimney for now).

I am just wondering, as I am thinking back to the old days when cable was new...in the town where I live cable gave you the local, Pittsburgh, and Cleveland stations.

Maybe this is another good thing that Congress can legislate to death.

[cdru]

The SHVIA renewal talk and the obvious direction the law is headed (to once again stick it to the consumer) brings up a question I've been wondering about.

On cable, I am able to receive stations (network and otherwise) from neighboring markets, even as I receive the 'local' equivalents. For example, my local cable has both the local and Pittsburgh NBC, FOX, and CBS stations. (only the local ABC station, though).

Why is it possible for me to get this on cable, and not DBS?
...
Maybe this is another good thing that Congress can legislate to death.
You answered your own question with your last sentence. The S in SHVIA stands for Satellite. It's basically the means which Congress regulates the satellite industry. Congress never votes for what is best for the consumer. Congress votes for who pays them the most money. Cable companies and networks have more money the satellite companies, so Congress passes laws that help out cable companies by restricting satellite companies.

Satellite companies have a leg up on cable companies as they have a large initial capital to launch a satellite, then minimal (relative) expenses to bring many different locals up. Cable companies have a comparitively larger cost of having to run new lines, trench, etc for a new local or to cover a new area.

[MikeSoltis]

Then my next stupid question would be, why does Congress need to 'regulate' the satellite (dbs) industry at all??

Seriously, what would be the downside to eliminating the SHVIA altogether (at least the portions which define what can and cannot be purchased/available to the consumer)??

[cdru]

Then my next stupid question would be, why does Congress need to 'regulate' the satellite (dbs) industry at all??

Seriously, what would be the downside to eliminating the SHVIA altogether (at least the portions which define what can and cannot be purchased/available to the consumer)??Because the cable industry would hurt as well as local affiliates in their eyes. I live in Fort Wayne, Indiana. Our local news is marginal and we don't have any major league sporting teams. I would love to get Indy locals, Chicago locals, and maybe New York or LA locals. If I get those, then my local affiliates will lose me watching them (and would also lose advertising dollars since they have less viewers). Out-of-market stations probably wouldn't care if you got their signal...just means more viewers for them. Your local stations would care as they have the exclusive rights in your DMA to give you CBS content for instance, but you aren't getting it from them.

Cable companies get away with this through the same loophole that allows Comcast Sports Network to control who can get their signal. If the signal doesn't go through the air, but rather through fiber or coax, then they can do as they want with it. They can set up a reception point in the other DMA and just send that back to the headend for distribution. Since satellite goes through the air, they don't have that luxury.

Satellite companies also have the benifit of having many differnet markets available to them and can make a return on their investment. It's not likely that Comcast down in Florida would make a return on the montly cost of receiving and transmitting Fort Wayne's locals down to them, but Dish has enough customers here to offset the monthly costs of the equipment and operation. So Dish (or DirecTV) can get into a lot of markets that can support them but not a bunch of distant cable companies. Since Dish can get many more locals then what a cable company can, they have the definite advantage. Cable companies realized that and so now we have SHVIA to "help" the cable companies.

[Cholly]

Cable companies in general have a sweetheart relationship with local broadcasters, since they extend the broadcaster's signals to customers who might not otherwise be able to receive them. Case in point: in my local area, the ABC affiliate also runs the local NBC feed. Their over the air signal is provided by a translator with minimal power (less than 100 watts). The only way most people in our area can receive NBC is via cable. As to satellite -- requests for waivers to allow reception of distant network feeds are routinely refused. Does SHVIA help the cable companies? You bet it does! :(

[Mark Holtz]

Unless they have changed the bill number, it's still S.2013, and you should write your congresscritters right now.

[Greg Bimson]

One must keep in mind that the SHVIA was passed on November 29, 1999, as an enablement tool. It kept the ability for satellite companies to retransmit networks to those that were unserved. It also enabled local delivery of stations within a given Nielsen market.

Fast forward to now. Dish Network offers locals for 119 markets. DirecTV offers locals to 64 markets, with a new satellite coming online in the next couple of months to offer 106 markets. Five years ago, there weren't any local markets on satellite.

Almost 80 percent of the nations households will be able to receive their market's local stations. It is now time to change the law to reflect how the competition offers local stations. That is what the proposed law, the SHVERA, does.

[catman]

When the bill wasfirst set up . Congress said " this is to make cable and satellite be eqeul . " Cable is higher and prices have not come down . If anything , there is MORE commerials .