Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

FCC Proposed Rules from SHVERA


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
103 replies to this topic

#61 OFFLINE   gor88

gor88

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 576 posts
Joined: May 09, 2003

Posted 08 February 2005 - 12:37 PM

I agree. Patience is needed. We should take time and evaluate the list of stations. If a station is totally missing, we should politely submit feedback to the FCC indicating this. If any cable company in the county (or other listed area) carries an OTA channel out of market not on this list, we should submit feedback and politely ask why there is a discrepancy.

Since those of us who are satellite junkies are the most interested about this issue, the lions share of consumer input on this issue will probably be from us. Maybe our feedback can help them improve the list before it is finalized.

...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#62 OFFLINE   gor88

gor88

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 576 posts
Joined: May 09, 2003

Posted 08 February 2005 - 12:42 PM

As to speaking with DirecTV, they are probably still trying to get their arms around distant network delivery and following the law in the SHVERA act. They're not going to be concerned about SV yet. Also, they are not required to do anything at all.

having said that, I think that the satellite companies will come on board. They are not as willing to add StanDef channels as of late. Allowing for SV channels is one way to attract more people on the edge of DMAs to go with satellite.

#63 OFFLINE   wkomorow

wkomorow

    DBSTalk Club Member

  • Registered
  • 337 posts
Joined: Apr 22, 2002

Posted 08 February 2005 - 12:47 PM

However, in the document and I quote:

"Based on the short time frame mandated by the SHVERA for publication of the SV List, as well as the legislative history, we believe that Congress intends for satellite carriers to make use of the SV List to expand their carriage offerings so that their subscribers can begin to experience the benefits of the SHVERA as soon as possible. We are confident that the SV List appended to this Notice has a high degree of accuracy and, therefore, believe that both cable and satellite carriers may rely on its validity to commence service, consistent with the other requirements set out in the SHVERA and this proceeding, prior to the adoption of a final list. "

#64 OFFLINE   BobMurdoch

BobMurdoch

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,009 posts
Joined: Apr 24, 2002

Posted 08 February 2005 - 01:13 PM

Scroll up this thread and make your opinions known through the FCC website to help get this corrected before they go too much farther.........
"The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation." Henry David Thoreau Walden (1854)

:ramblinon


XBox 360 Gamertag::grin:
Posted Image

#65 OFFLINE   JohnH

JohnH

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 7,802 posts
Joined: Apr 22, 2002

Posted 08 February 2005 - 01:49 PM

Good question. Actually, the way this list reads, the significantly viewed stations INCLUDE those within the market. For example, Rankin (and Hinds) County reads as follows:

WLBT-TV 3 Jackson, MS
WJTV-TV 12 Jackson, MS
WAPT-TV 16 Jackson, MS
+WDBD-TV 40 Jackson, MS

All these stations are in the Jackson market which Rankin definitely belongs to. I figured that if this list only included out-of-market SV stations, the Hinds and Rankin lists should say "no significantly viewed stations in this county".

Given this pattern, why doesn't Lauderdale county (Meridian) NOT show its own NBC and CBS affiliates? Why doesn't the ABC in Tupelo/Columbus show in Chickasaw county, where the tower and city of license reside?

My point here is that, the way the list appears to be assembled, the stations I mentioned earlier should be significantly viewed in their own market. They would receive at least 3% of the total viewing in their markets. The stations may not be signficantly viewed outside of their market. However, having them omitted completely indicates a problem with the overall list IMHO.


From the look of the stations listed, they may predate DMA type market listings. Remember this list was started in 1972 and some of the old channels may appear when there is no current need for them to appear, because they are in the DMA as your local channels now. They do not need the Significantly Viewed status. You already get them if they elected to be carried.

#66 OFFLINE   Link

Link

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,744 posts
Joined: Feb 01, 2004

Posted 08 February 2005 - 02:11 PM

What are these lists based on? I know that some of the Illinois and Indiana stations watch more significantly viewed than what is listed and cable carries more than this.

For example in Knox County, IN, they should get Evansville channels 7, 9, 14, 25, and 44, not just 7. While Vincennes is closer to Evansville, they are in the Terre Haute DMA (which I have never understood why Terre Haute would get higher Nielsen ratings than Evansville stations would in that county keeping Knox County out of Evansville's DMA).

#67 OFFLINE   JohnH

JohnH

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 7,802 posts
Joined: Apr 22, 2002

Posted 08 February 2005 - 02:20 PM

What are these lists based on? I know that some of the Illinois and Indiana stations watch more significantly viewed than what is listed and cable carries more than this.

For example in Knox County, IN, they should get Evansville channels 7, 9, 14, 25, and 44, not just 7. While Vincennes is closer to Evansville, they are in the Terre Haute DMA (which I have never understood why Terre Haute would get higher Nielsen ratings than Evansville stations would in that county keeping Knox County out of Evansville's DMA).


Significantly viewed status is only acheived by OTA reception figures.

The Terre Haute thing may be because of WTWO(NBC) and WTHI(CBS) being there for long time.

#68 OFFLINE   Maphisto's Sidekick

Maphisto's Sidekick

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 21 posts
Joined: Feb 07, 2005

Posted 08 February 2005 - 02:20 PM

You shouldn't lose any channels. The significantly viewed list is only optional (for the satellite companies) and additive.


In other words, D* and E* are generally allowed to offer:

All full-power broadcast stations from your market

PLUS

All stations from the significantly viewed list

PLUS

Any other station for which D*/E* can get a waiver from the in-market station that would provide competition


One strangeness I found in the list: In California, El Dorado County East (South Lake Tahoe) has no SV stations, but the comment "Over 90% cable penetration" appears in its place. That factoid doesn't surprise me, but what does the "90% cable penetration" mark have to do with the new SV rules?

One challenge to the list's accuracy: The FCC apparently forgot about the creation of Broomfield County, CO

#69 OFFLINE   derwin0

derwin0

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 538 posts
Joined: Jan 31, 2005

Posted 08 February 2005 - 02:53 PM

SV status is achieved only by using OTA ratings.
The 90% cable penetration comment probably says there are no measurable OTA ratings in that area since they are less than 10% of the total.

#70 OFFLINE   gor88

gor88

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 576 posts
Joined: May 09, 2003

Posted 08 February 2005 - 03:20 PM

From the look of the stations listed, they may predate DMA type market listings. Remember this list was started in 1972 and some of the old channels may appear when there is no current need for them to appear, because they are in the DMA as your local channels now. They do not need the Significantly Viewed status. You already get them if they elected to be carried.


Agreed. I just figure that the FCC should be consistent.

I did notice that WABG ABC6 and WXVT CBS15 in the small Greenwood-Greenville market do appear as SV in a few counties outside of their market. Given this, there is a small possibility that maybe a county or two might qualify for one or more of the missing stations. The best example is Yazoo County, just about 20 miles north of the missing Vicksburg FOX. I would guarantee you that WUFX qualifies to be added to their list according to the established standards. Dish Network considers the county in Jackson market, but DirecTV counts it in Greenwood-Greenville. Once DirecTV releases their locals, Yazoo county DirecTV locals subscribers wouldn't get the SV FOX station unless it is added to the list.

#71 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,256 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 08 February 2005 - 03:36 PM

Are Lake and Porter Counties in the South Bend DMA? If so the answer is here.
One has to ask how did they get those stations, since this is the list they are supposed to be working from?

Lake and Porter are in the Chicago IL DMA. LaPorte is also in the Chicago DMA, but two of South Bend's stations are on THE LIST in LaPorte county.

Indianapolis and Lafayette stations and subscribers should enjoy this.
THE LIST opens up WLFI to four more Indiana counties than their DMA.
WTTV is on THE LIST for many counties. It's not perfect and isn't final, but it is a big step in the right direction!

JL

#72 OFFLINE   Marvin

Marvin

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 301 posts
Joined: Sep 13, 2003

Posted 08 February 2005 - 09:16 PM

Wicomico County MD -

WMAR
WBAL
WJZ-TV
WTTG

At least I'll be getting FOX/NBC locally instead of having to watch NY...now if Directv would only offer my locals..

#73 OFFLINE   DaveP

DaveP

    Cool Member/Supporter

  • Gold Members
  • 21 posts
Joined: Dec 08, 2003

Posted 08 February 2005 - 10:00 PM

I also noticed the list includes Canadian and Mexican stations. This gives DBS the ability to transmit these within the country with just normal copyright payments?


I sure hope so... the thing I miss most about dropping cable was not getting CBC from Canada anymore. Most of the cable companies in southeast Michigan carry CBC, but neither Dish nor DirecTV carry it.

Of course there's really only two things I watch on CBC - the olympics (they actually show the sports and not the sob stories), and hockey... and we all know how much hockey I'm missing this year... :nono2:

#74 OFFLINE   sbturner

sbturner

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 134 posts
Joined: Jul 24, 2002

Posted 08 February 2005 - 10:03 PM

So when is Dish going to offering the new stations out of market and will they be able to get those on the dish you have now?

#75 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,256 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 08 February 2005 - 10:30 PM

So when is Dish going to offering the new stations out of market and will they be able to get those on the dish you have now?

Eventually and maybe.

The way the NPRM was worded, the FCC is "confident" about their list and seems to expect the satellite providers to begin their efforts to offer the extra channels to customers. Anyone taking that leap would have to trust that the FCC rules in the NPRM would be close enough to the final rules that the satellite providers don't have to back off on any plans.

Satellite providers are required to give 60 day notice to ALL stations in the market where each SigViewed station will be offered (not just the station of the same network in the FCC's interpretation). That puts the very first possible SigViewed offering 60 days away from whenever a satellite provider notifies the affected stations. That pretty much puts this into mid April *AT THE EARLIEST*.

Will you need a new dish? Probably not ... E* will probably not offer stations AS SigViewed unless they are on Dish500. Especially with the initial rollouts.

JL

#76 OFFLINE   Jacob S

Jacob S

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 7,657 posts
Joined: Apr 14, 2002

Posted 08 February 2005 - 10:48 PM

Offering additional channels would just cost the satellite companies more money particularly in the smaller markets since they would have to pay more to get you your locals so I do not see the satellite companies rushing to get these channels to you unless your in a market that does not get all your network channels so they can charge you the full rate. This would also take up space from getting additional markets added.

#77 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,256 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 08 February 2005 - 10:59 PM

Offering additional channels would just cost the satellite companies more money particularly in the smaller markets since they would have to pay more to get you your locals so I do not see the satellite companies rushing to get these channels to you unless your in a market that does not get all your network channels so they can charge you the full rate. This would also take up space from getting additional markets added.

Most channels that will be offered as SigViewed are already up serving their own markets. It isn't a question of taking up more space ... just turning them on to more customers.

The only places I see it requiring adding channels is in markets that are not yet uplinked at all. For example, Lafayette Indiana. They are a market with one TV station that up to this point would be a hard sell. With SHVERA allowing the Indianapolis and Terre Haute stations as SigViewed it is a saleable market. Not bad to be able to uplink one more channel and get $5+ per customer in the market for the trouble.

But the first SigViewed will be existing channels opened to more viewers. No extra bandwidth required. :D

JL

#78 OFFLINE   Link

Link

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,744 posts
Joined: Feb 01, 2004

Posted 09 February 2005 - 11:34 AM

I was looking at the Indiana counties html page on the website. All the counties in the Terre Haute DMA should have WTTV 4 and WRTV 6 listed. WRTV is their primary source for ABC in those counties because no other ABC station is available. A few of the southern counties might have WEHT 25 from Evansville listed.

Also, with a good outside antenna, WISH 8, WTHR 13, and WXIN 59 can be received from most of the counties in the Terre Haute DMA so I don't know why those aren't listed.

#79 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,256 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 09 February 2005 - 01:27 PM

Also, with a good outside antenna, WISH 8, WTHR 13, and WXIN 59 can be received from most of the counties in the Terre Haute DMA so I don't know why those aren't listed.

IIRC there is a threshold (3%?) of population that must watch the channel OTA (not via satellite or cable) to qualify it as Significantly Viewed. Yes, a good antenna can get it. But do at least 3% of the TV viewers in your county watch those channels?

This is where data is needed. Nelson information showing that at least 3% of a county or smaller community within a county watch a particular channel. Present that data to the FCC and get the channel added to the list!

(Obviously that places the burden on the stations who have access to the data on a community by community level.)

JL

#80 OFFLINE   Maphisto's Sidekick

Maphisto's Sidekick

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 21 posts
Joined: Feb 07, 2005

Posted 09 February 2005 - 01:59 PM

In the comments I've sent to the FCC, I suggested that the definition of "significantly viewed" that they're using creates competitive issues, both in terms of cable vs DBS, as well as in terms of specialty (Spanish, noncommercial, or newer/minor network) stations versus more established major network stations.

On cable vs. satellite: there are examples out there where even with SigViewed, local cable companies will offer extra/different broadcast stations than DBS will be allowed to deliver. Examples:

  • Comcast delivers WBZ and WSBK in Northhampton, MA
  • Cox carries WGBY, WDMR, WWLP, and WGGB in Windsor Locks, CT
  • Charter in South Lake Tahoe, CA carries Reno nets and KGO out of SFO, even though it's technically in the Sacremento market, and "significantly viewed" is undefined there.
  • The fun of Lee Vining, CA is left as an exercise for the reader.

I've suggested that when evaluating whether a station is "significantly viewed" for a potential subscriber, that the rule be:

  • The station is in-market to the consumer; or
  • The station achieves a minimum viewing level within the consumer's community (i.e., the current definition of sv); or
  • The consumer is within the station's Class B contour; or
  • The station is the geographically closest network affiliate for its network to the consumer if there is no network affiliate within that market; or
  • The station is already available to a consumer if they were to subscribe to a competing cable or DBS system.

That's still more restrictive than what I'd like to have (unrestricted distant nets), but I think it's saner/fairer than what's been proposed.

If I can get a station OTA with an antenna, D*/E* should be allowed to deliver it to me. If I can get it on my local cable system, D*/E* should be allowed to deliver it to me. If I can get it on D* or E*, my local cable system should be allowed to deliver it to me. And if there isn't a local WB station, Cable, D*, or E* should be free to let me subscribe to an out-of-market affiliate.

Feel free to plagiarize those ideas when commenting to the FCC. :D




Protected By... spam firewall...And...