1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

DirecTV going back to OTA for locals?

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by mnassour, May 16, 2013.

  1. May 17, 2013 #21 of 142
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Dumb, dumb, dumb. They did well *after* they added local stations LiL. That was a key thing in their success.

    More saber rattling?
     
  2. May 17, 2013 #22 of 142
    carl6

    carl6 Moderator Staff Member DBSTalk Club

    12,488
    940
    Nov 15, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    True, but customers with an AM21 are in the significant minority. Building OTA back into receivers would provide it to all customers. I also have two AM21's, but rarely watch OTA.
     
  3. May 17, 2013 #23 of 142
    CCarncross

    CCarncross Hall Of Fame

    7,058
    60
    Jul 19, 2005
    Jackson
    I believe the reason they are in the significant minority is most dont use OTA and dont want to use OTA. Hence the whole reason they took it out of their STB's...unecessary added expenses to the cost of the boxes and everyone wanted cheaper stbs, which in all honesty we got until the Genie's came along. HR20's were I believe $299 lease when they came out, maybe $399, most people if they do pay only get charged $99 or $199 for an HR2x model these days.
     
  4. May 17, 2013 #24 of 142
    HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,319
    185
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    I really think so ....

    Can you imagine DIRECTV letting the billions of dollars they've spent on space and ground facilities for LiL spot beam technology since the late '90s essentially go to waste with such a plan? Too absurd to even contemplate ...
    :nono2: :nono2: :nono2:
     
  5. May 17, 2013 #25 of 142
    machavez00

    machavez00 Hall Of Fame

    3,761
    11
    Nov 2, 2006
    Phoenix,...
    I used the OTA tuner in my HR20 before getting a Genie. We have a ME TV affiliate on a sub channel that will most likely be never be carried by DirecTV. The AM21N can scan for channels with the Genie, unlike the HR20 that relies on data from TMS. DirecTV stopped adding OTA channels to the database sometime ago. I will be ordering an AM21N soon.
     
  6. May 17, 2013 #26 of 142
    jdspencer

    jdspencer Hall Of Fame

    6,645
    13
    Nov 7, 2003
    The CSRs have enough problems with current equipment. Can you imagine what kind pf questions they would need to answer if this ever came back?
     
  7. May 17, 2013 #27 of 142
    billsharpe

    billsharpe Hall Of Fame

    2,697
    73
    Jan 25, 2007
    Southern...
    I signed up for DirecTV to get both local channels and "cable" channels that I could easily record. The OTA tuner in my HR20-700 let me record a number of local channels that DirecTV didn't carry.

    I also get an excellent picture OTA directly on my two HD sets, so that I can watch programs even when I'm recording two other programs. There are 136 OTA channels available in the Los Angeles area.
     
  8. May 18, 2013 #28 of 142
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    7,358
    735
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    That's a really interesting idea. Having a way to integrate the OTA signal into a SWM channel would be a big win. Once a tuner has pulled in the signal it is just MPEG2, which Directv receivers can already handle, and SWM LNBs/multiswitches are already performing frequency shifting. Theoretically at least a next generation SWM that included an ATSC tuner could shift an OTA signal on a SWM channel in a manner that could be made to work with existing receivers.

    There's still the bigger problem of where does the OTA signal come from, but they've got that problem no matter what. Integrating it with SWM would at least avoid the need for an OTA tuner in the receivers, and if it were somehow done in a way that was compatible with all existing SWM capable receivers it would be a huge win for Directv. They'd only need to replace the SWM LNB/multiswitch with a new one and route the OTA signal into it.

    As someone who has an OTA antenna and still has 17 H20s in service due to the need for that tuner, if I was able to replace my SWM-16s with a new model that would take an OTA input and pass it through via SWM, I'd jump at the chance. I've got 7 H24/AM21 pairs, I'd love to be able to ditch all the AM21s without losing my locals, that would be awesome!

    Thinking of stuff like this makes me even more curious what Directv is planning/considering. If all they end up doing is subsidizing people to install OTA antennas and giving them free AM21s when Directv has a fight with a local station in their DMA, I'll be mightily disappointed :sure:
     
  9. May 18, 2013 #29 of 142
    NR4P

    NR4P Dad

    6,361
    272
    Jan 15, 2007
    Sunny Florida
    I've been suggesting the increased support of OTA for at least 2 years here at dbstalk. To help cutback on Directv retransmission fees as they cite and to solve rain fade problems for those that have it bad, like I do in the SE USA. I know many folks who have left Directv over rain fade, this will solve some that too.

    I look forward to this to replace 1 or more of my 4 AM21's someday.
     
  10. May 18, 2013 #30 of 142
    n3vino

    n3vino Godfather

    476
    8
    Oct 2, 2011
    Leon...
    I think that it would be great if it would lower our bills and we wouldn't have to worry about greedy negotiations with broadcasters that have a lot of stations through out the U.S. However, the D* receivers would have to act as tuners. In my case, only one of my four TV's has a tuner at this time. Another big downside, is that I have a narrow window of LOS from the transmitters and there are a lot of trees in the way. Most of the transmitters are 26 miles away to the S.E.
     
  11. May 18, 2013 #31 of 142
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    I have no problem with OTA integration. It is a plus as far as I'm concerned. But I don't get the logic that it helps cutback on retrans fees. Can you explain why you think it does? Other than dumping retrans, that is.
     
  12. May 18, 2013 #32 of 142
    machavez00

    machavez00 Hall Of Fame

    3,761
    11
    Nov 2, 2006
    Phoenix,...
    If I recall correctly, the ability to to combine OTA and DBS over the same COAX was touted when SWiM was introduced.
     
  13. May 18, 2013 #33 of 142
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    7,358
    735
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Because fewer customers would be affected/angry if a local station made Directv quit carrying them for a while during negotiations, Directv would be able to hold out longer and have a better chance of negotiating a lower rate.
     
  14. May 18, 2013 #34 of 142
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    7,358
    735
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    It made diplexing possible again, until they introduced DECA. Since Directv chose its own frequencies instead of using the standard MoCA ones that conflicted with satellite frequencies, I wonder why they didn't choose a low frequency range to fit it into the gap between VHF and UHF frequencies? Then you have still diplexed OTA, albeit with a slightly more complex diplexer.
     
  15. May 18, 2013 #35 of 142
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    7,358
    735
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    It seems pretty unlikely Directv would try to promote a solution that relied on the tuner in your TV. It wouldn't allow for you to select the channel in the guide like you can now, and more importantly, wouldn't allow you to record it. Few would be interested in installing Directv's OTA solution, even as a backup in case of rain fade or negotiations gone wrong, if there was no way to record. It would look pretty lame compared to Dish's ads touting their ability to record all four broadcast networks at once.

    Either the tuner would return to the receivers, or we'd see the more interesting solution of having having the SWM LNB/multiswitch able to provide OTA over a SWM channel.
     
  16. May 18, 2013 #36 of 142
    KyL416

    KyL416 Hall Of Fame

    4,413
    602
    Nov 10, 2005
    Tobyhanna, PA
    Diplexing isn't for OTA only, it's also used for cable and the frequencies between VHF and UHF are used by cable channels 23-64.
    Basically it's like this:
    VHF Lo (2-6)
    FM Radio 88.1-108.0 (Cable channels 95-97)
    Cable channels 98-99 and 14-22
    VHF Hi (7-13)
    Cable Channels 23-64
    UHF 14-43 (2 MHz offset from cable channels 65-94)
    UHF 44-69 (2 MHz offset from cable channels 100-125)
    Former UHF 70-83 (2 MHz offset from cable channels 126-139)
    Cable channels 140-158

    Since most analog TVs only go up to 125 after they discontinued use of UHF 70-83, cable channels 126-158 are used for digital cable only, although once you reach 850 MHz (channel 133) you are beyond the cutoff of most diplexers.
     
  17. May 18, 2013 #37 of 142
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    7,358
    735
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    There are probably 100 people who want to have both satellite and OTA for every one who wants to have both satellite and cable. Just because a solution only worked for diplexing OTA and not for diplexing cable doesn't mean it wouldn't have been worthwhile for them to do. They could have saved many people from having to run additional coax for OTA. The few who want both satellite and cable would be no worse off than they are today.

    Perhaps there were other considerations for why they chose the frequency range they did for DECA that precluded them being able to fit in between VHF and UHF.
     
  18. May 18, 2013 #38 of 142
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Okay but what is the value of that? The vast, vast majority of deals get done without a second of down time. Are you saying directv would be more willing to tick off the non OTA customers just to make a harder bargain? I'm not seeing it.
     
  19. May 18, 2013 #39 of 142
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    7,358
    735
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Well, that's what this whole thread is about. Directv appears to be dropping hints that they might do just that, because the local stations keep increasing their demands every time around and that's not sustainable, particularly for something which is FREE to those who have an antenna!
     
  20. May 18, 2013 #40 of 142
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    And I'm saying it makes no sense. It is a bluff and won't work.
     

Share This Page