What's in SHIVA for me as an consumer?

[TANK]

I have D*,what will I gain or lose with SHIVA?

[BobMurdoch]

E* subscribers will lose PQ (or locals) when they have to move all of those side satellite channels off the wings. D* subscribers will see new local channels trickle to a halt unless a breakthrough comes up with a way to cram more content into a transponder. Distant networks for both will also go away unless you have a waiver (for those grandfathered in from 1999 and before)

[TANK]

Ok thanks for explaining that.Now I know why everyone watching this bill.

[jrbdmb]

E* subscribers will lose PQ (or locals) when they have to move all of those side satellite channels off the wings. D* subscribers will see new local channels trickle to a halt unless a breakthrough comes up with a way to cram more content into a transponder. Distant networks for both will also go away unless you have a waiver (for those grandfathered in from 1999 and before)Some E* subs may need to get a Dish300 (for 61.5 / 148) or Superdish to get their locals, but I don't see how any markets will lose locals out of this (i.e to get all NYC locals on 110 / 119, a small market like Burlington or Harrisburg may get bumped to a wing or Superdish - but there are no net new channels being added). Since D* is in compliance (they've never split locals up) now, don't see how this affects them at all.

As for distants, I don't think waivers will help anymore - if you can get your locals via satellite, you get them or distants, not both.

[BobMurdoch]

ACTUALLY< now that I think of it, the best solution may be to do the opposite of what Congress intends, but something that may adhere to the letter of the law. If all locals have to be available from the "same" dish, then in order to avoid huge PQ drops or the dropping of local stations in smaller markets ALL local channels in some markets may get bumped to the wings. So if Ft. Lauderdale has to have all it's locals on the "same" satellite to be in compliance, then ALL of the local channels should be moved off of 110 and put on 61.5. E* would wind up having to buy a lot of dish installs, but this would alleviate them having to drop markets or cause PQ to look like an old Moonlighting episode (ya know, where they put so much vaseline on the lens to hide Cybill Shepherd's advancing age lines). The NAB would be satisfied as there would no longer be a second tier status put on all those redundant shopping channels and Spanish language stations, but customers might balk at having to have two dishes on their roof (unless the huge Superdish can do the job instead). E* would respond by saying that Congress "forced" them to do it to get in compliance.

[Geronimo]

The Superdish won't get 61.5. It si designed to pick up 105 0r 121. Big difference in location.

[scooper]

Back to the original poster - What's in the new SHVIRA for you ? - Easy - the continued ability to watch your local broadcast TV stations via DBS. A few "enhancements" to satisfy the NAB - no split locals on a 2nd dish, locals / distants eligibilty refined, etc.

[Art7220]

Also, what's in the new SHVIRA is the fact that they didn't ban ExpressVU so you can still watch US networks on there. I had to get one because DN wouldn't get CBC, CTV, or Global so I can watch Speaker's Corner, Corner Gas and Train 48, which DN doesn't carry.

And the non ban extends to Star Choice, if you wanted to get that instead.

There's a lot more choice which local broadcasters and other programmers don't want you to know about.

-A-

[dlp85x]

Distant networks for both will also go away unless you have a waiver (for those grandfathered in from 1999 and before)

Well what if you were granted a waiver approval after 1999? I have Dish Network, and I recently got a FOX waiver approved in January of this year. Does that mean I will suddenly lose my distants when the new SHIVA is passed, after the local FOX station here used their own discretion to approve my waiver? That seems sort of odd, especially since many have picked up distant networks after 1999 and would lose them! I understand how 1999 would be the 'grandfathering' year for people who already had distants prior to then to keep their programming, but I don't see why people who got a waiver approval after 1999 would suddenly lose their distant stations automatically. I hope that the new SHVIA doesn't call for all waiver approvals or distant network qualifications granted after 1999 to be cancelled! With all of this said, I haven't read into the SHVIA further than the posts on this board, so I might've missed something. Correct me if I am wrong of course, or am not understanding the situation here.

[Geronimo]

As it stands now there will be no waivers. None. Makes no sesnse to me but others have said that is---fair.

[dlp85x]

As it stands now there will be no waivers. None. Makes no sesnse to me but others have said that is---fair.

I agree with it not making sense. I always thought that if your waiver was approved, it was set in stone unless the station itself decides to pull the waiver approval, not Congress via a new SHVIA. I mean whats the point of approving a waiver if you are a station only to have that same waiver automatically denied when the new SHVIA comes around? I've heard many people say that 'its set in stone' with waiver approvals being permanent on this forum, so I guess they are now wrong if you got your waiver after 1999. I didn't think a new SHVIA would take away anything approved after 1999...that seems sort of odd. Maybe I read you wrong, if I did so then I apologize. If you meant that there will be no waivers after the new SHVIA is introduced, but anything approved prior to the new SHVIA still stands, then I guess that is fair, especially if those in the 'white areas' where there are no immediate locals would be able to get a close market to them on the same spotbeam, and not just nothing at all.

Finally, until reading this thread, I always thought that you were grandfathered with whatever you had prior to 1999 (I guess when the current SHVIA came around), but you would be grandfathered under whatever you have now if you have a waiver approval when the new SHVIA passes. Maybe I read everything wrong?

[MikeP]

What if you live in a true white area, get two sets of distants and get your locals from the DMA you live in? I'd hope they'd allow people in white areas to still qualify for distant nets.

[freakmonkey]

What if you live in a true white area, get two sets of distants and get your locals from the DMA you live in? I'd hope they'd allow people in white areas to still qualify for distant nets.


from what i have read if enacted you will be forced to choose between your local dma and the distant nets. you will no longer be able to have two sets of distants and your local dma. it still has not been clarified if you can keep both ditant nets or only one. my guess is only one which sucks because with la/ny you dont have to pick which show to watch if they both come on at same time diffrent stations. the main reason i got the distants. also my locals are always preempting the network shows for their on crap. this really really really sucks!

[Tusk]

As it stands now there will be no waivers. None. Makes no sesnse to me but others have said that is---fair.
I thought the proposed legislation was saying that if you currently have a waiver for Fox (for example) and you get the distant network Fox and now the sat company carries your local Fox, you can no longer have both just because you have a waiver. Because the sat company is carrying your locals, your waivers are now void.

I don't think this would effect people in areas without sat locals who have waivers, but I've been wrong before.

[spanishannouncetable]

The new law is not finalized, so it's all still speculation. What they are considering doing breaks down like this -

A) If you are a new subscriber after the new law takes effect and your TV market is available on satellite, that is all the networks you can get. PERIOD. No waivers, no white areas inside the market, no distant net availability, nothing else.

B) If you already have distant nets, either by waiver or by living in a white area inside an available market, you will be given the option of keeping a single set of distants (NY or LA from D*) or your market's locals. You cannot keep 2 sets of distants as allowed under current law. If you ever give up your distants, you will never get them back.

C) If you live in a white area OUTSIDE of any available market, you will still be allowed to get 2 sets of distant nets the same way you can get them now, no waivers necessary. Since spot beams will allow coverage of over 97% of the country, these areas will be few and far between.

CBS and Fox have special rules concerning distant HD channel availability. If you live in a market whose affiliate is owned & operated by CBS or Fox, they will allow you to receive the NY or LA HD channel if you subscribe to satellite locals. If you live in a white area and have distant net service you can also get them. If you currently have distant nets via waiver you are also allowed to get the HD channels regardless of whether or not the local affiliate is an O&O station.

It comes down to congress kissing the ass of the NAB. They gotta keep that special-interest money coming in, so to support the antiquated business model the NAB loves so much they are finally closing the loopholes and writing another piece of consumer-unfriendly law. Thanks, jackasses :(

[mraub]

Does anyone think the concept of "digital white area" has any legs in Congress? I know NAB opposes, but surely Congress is not going to give them everything they want. Congress also has an interest in speeding the transition to digital so they can convert the analog spectrum into some much needed cash.

MIKE

[jdspencer]

Until DirecTV offers me all of my locals, including the low power, retransmitted and cable only ones, they better not mess with my waivers, regardless of when I got them.

[waltinvt]

CBS and Fox have special rules concerning distant HD channel availability. If you live in a market whose affiliate is owned & operated by CBS or Fox, they will allow you to receive the NY or LA HD channel if you subscribe to satellite locals. If you live in a white area and have distant net service you can also get them. If you currently have distant nets via waiver you are also allowed to get the HD channels regardless of whether or not the local affiliate is an O&O station.

Why is Dish only providing the CBS HD and not the Fox HD also?

[spanishannouncetable]

Why is Dish only providing the CBS HD and not the Fox HD also?

Dish Network has an agreement with CBS only. Directv recently came to the same agreement so they now carry CBS as well.

News Corp. owns both the Fox Network and the controlling interest in Directv, so adding Fox HD to Directv was a no brainer. Echostar has no agreement to carry Fox HD.

[Skyboss]

E* subscribers will lose PQ (or locals) when they have to move all of those side satellite channels off the wings. D* subscribers will see new local channels trickle to a halt unless a breakthrough comes up with a way to cram more content into a transponder. Distant networks for both will also go away unless you have a waiver (for those grandfathered in from 1999 and before)


Actually no. What is occuring now is that some customers get ABC, CBS and ABC, FOX from a primary satellite and PBS, WB, UPN and other feeds from another satellite requiring the use of two dishes to get all of their local channels. What this changes is that all of the locals have to come from the same satellite. It doesn't mean D* or E* can't use two satellites. The result will simply be some markets requiring a second dish to get locals as D* is proposing with the 72 slot. In today's environment, peopel use one dish for the main networks and then dump the second dish figuring "I'll never watch those channels anyway".

[Geronimo]

In reality the WBS and the like are usually on the "main" satellite. The side sats tend to get the foreign language, independent, and other channels.

[Chris Freeland]

Actually no. What is occuring now is that some customers get ABC, CBS and ABC, FOX from a primary satellite and PBS, WB, UPN and other feeds from another satellite requiring the use of two dishes to get all of their local channels. What this changes is that all of the locals have to come from the same satellite. It doesn't mean D* or E* can't use two satellites. The result will simply be some markets requiring a second dish to get locals as D* is proposing with the 72 slot. In today's environment, peopel use one dish for the main networks and then dump the second dish figuring "I'll never watch those channels anyway".

With maybe 1 or 2 exceptions, the local WB, UPN and most popular PBS and even a Spanish channel along with the Big 4 nets are on the main satellite on these split markets. It is only extra PBS's, Christian nets, some extra Spanish channels and local shopping channels that mostly duplicate channels E* has already Nationally that require a 2nd dish to get.

[Skyboss]

It was an example, but yes you got it. I've read some posts about this where people have assumed that the use of a second dish it out, which is not the case. Personally, I'd like them to stick all of the International Programming on a different sat and use the primary location for programming the majority of America can understand. We are an english speaking national are we not??? At least I think we are... For D* alone, Para Todos takes up 2 Transponders. I mean, damn.

[Link]

Dish Network has an agreement with CBS only. Directv recently came to the same agreement so they now carry CBS as well.

News Corp. owns both the Fox Network and the controlling interest in Directv, so adding Fox HD to Directv was a no brainer. Echostar has no agreement to carry Fox HD.

Since when and on what channel does Directv offer Fox East and West in HDTV?

[Tusk]

Since when and on what channel does Directv offer Fox East and West in HDTV?
Will be added sometime this summer. Probably after the 7s transition.

[hoopsbwc34]

A) If you are a new subscriber after the new law takes effect and your TV market is available on satellite, that is all the networks you can get. PERIOD. No waivers, no white areas inside the market, no distant net availability, nothing else.


So to clarify, does this mean if ANY local channels are available via spot beam you have to get those locals? Say I live in a smaller town hundreds of miles outside of Denver, but the Denver spot beam still covers my location. I am REQUIRED to take the Denver channels?

[spanishannouncetable]

So to clarify, does this mean if ANY local channels are available via spot beam you have to get those locals? Say I live in a smaller town hundreds of miles outside of Denver, but the Denver spot beam still covers my location. I am REQUIRED to take the Denver channels?

If Nielsen Media Research has your little town listed as part of the Denver DMA, you would get Denver locals and no others. If your town is in the Pueblo/Colorado Springs DMA then those are the locals you get. Same for every other small town nationwide, whichever locals Nielsen decides you are supposed to have will be the ones you will get.

There may be a provision for satellite services to add "significantly viewed" channels from a second DMA the way cable systems can (as in Wilkesboro, NC which is in the Greensboro DMA but gets GBO and Charlotte locals on cable because Wilkesboro is physically closer to Charlotte). The NAB will probably fight that the way they do everything else that consumers want :(

[waltinvt]

The origional house bill (before it went to the senate) had a clause that would allow satellite to send the HD version of a network if the viewer could not get HD from the local affilliate. Did that get scrapped or just isn't being talked about ?
WaltinVt