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

DIRECTV Re: OTA: "We Will Have a Dual Tuner Solution"

Discussion in 'DIRECTV HD DVR/Receiver Discussion' started by Tom Robertson, Oct 28, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dec 7, 2007 #821 of 1344
    mhayes70

    mhayes70 New Member

    4,224
    3
    Mar 21, 2006
    Exactly and Thank you!
     
  2. Dec 7, 2007 #822 of 1344
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    What game is what over?
    What scrambling? My first post was 3 months ago. This solution has been planned for some time before that.

    DIRECTV does care about users who want OTA, apparently about 10% of the DIRECTV populace. Not a small number by any means, then again, not the earth shattering mass populace either. :)
     
  3. Dec 7, 2007 #823 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    30 cents?

    Try multiple magnitudes higher then that...

    And it is not "making" more, just reducing their loss.
    They still take a loss on the hardware, even after the reduced cost.

    You shouldn't... don't bend over backwards... go find the technology that you want. Do you still have OTA on the system you have? Or did they magically take that away to?

    OTA is no longer is not as critical as it was 4 years ago, or 2 years ago, when design on the HR20 was started...

    For every 1 customer they lose because of the loss of OTA... my guess is they gain several more, because of what is available via the SAT.
     
  4. Dec 7, 2007 #824 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    Please
    Link us to the statement made by DirecTV on who is making them?
    And it is hardly a scramble....

    But hey... what do I know.
     
  5. Dec 7, 2007 #825 of 1344
    Maruuk

    Maruuk Hall Of Fame

    1,951
    9
    Dec 4, 2007
    Tiger--wow, great pickup on that scheme! Whatever it is, it's highly plausible. I love it, DTV DEACTIVATES the HR20 OTA tuners! How ironic. But wouldn't a far simpler solution to lost revenues be to simply raise their rates overall?

    What makes this story so credible is that the major nets are all getting killed by the commercial-skip DVR syndrome. Even the lousy :30 rush-forwards one on the HR21 pretty much negates the ads. So the nets are being forced to generate revenues in new, PPV-style modes. The beauty of that for us content-wise is that they will have to start competing against the HBOs, they can't keep feeding us Dancing with the Celebutards and expect us to pay for it.
     
  6. Dec 7, 2007 #826 of 1344
    TigerDriver

    TigerDriver Electronics Engineer

    570
    0
    Jul 27, 2007
    Any idea the percentage who get HD locals via spotbeam?
     
  7. Dec 7, 2007 #827 of 1344
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    Yes the FCC mandated this change, which will occur on February 17, 2009.
    No looking backward or backward compatibility for broadcast channels.
    Nothing requires any changes to Cable channels by mandate. Just by user demand. :)

    DIRECTV will eventually adjust there price models again, but they do that all the time. February 17, 2009 itself won't likely be a major date on their model as they will still have MANY SD channels and HD channels.

    DIRECTV already has spotbeam capacity built into their pricing models. (Just as DishNetwork and local cable companies have pricing for locals built into their models.)

    Yes, the FCC's move was VERY ballsy, but IMHO needed to happen if Digital TV was ever going to move forward. Many details of this long process can be found at www.dtv.gov. :)

    Happy Holidays!
    Tom
     
  8. Dec 7, 2007 #828 of 1344
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    Not nearly enough yet, IMHO. :) That said, it isn't all DIRECTVs fault, some companies choose to require DIRECTV to pay to carry the HD channel. Negotiations continue, I expect. :)

    As of now, about 70% of the population has access to DIRECTV HD locals. That doesn't mean they all get all their local channels; a major part of the need for OTA on the receivers. And why DIRECTV is taking steps to ensure the people who want OTA can get OTA.

    Happy Holidays!
    Tom
     
  9. Dec 7, 2007 #829 of 1344
    Maruuk

    Maruuk Hall Of Fame

    1,951
    9
    Dec 4, 2007
    The gotcha aspect of this locals deal is: The FCC in its divine wisdom insists that distant net access is blocked to folks who can get that net locally OTA. But if DTV doesn't provide you with a means to receive and record OTA, you're stymied for the nets altogether. That's nasty. And probably why DTV is scrambling to put things right.
     
  10. Dec 7, 2007 #830 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    What has DirecTV done that has stopped you from obtaining technology to do what you want?

    Why is it that DirecTV has to provide you the equipment to access a signal that is not theirs?
     
  11. Dec 7, 2007 #831 of 1344
    say-what

    say-what Active Member

    5,795
    15
    Dec 14, 2006
    New Orleans
    Why is it DirecTV's obligation to provide you with an OTA solution? Cable sure doesn't for those locals they don't yet carry. It's your obligation to have a digital OTA tuner - that's why the gov't will provide you with a $40 coupon to get one for your TV.
     
  12. Dec 7, 2007 #832 of 1344
    TigerDriver

    TigerDriver Electronics Engineer

    570
    0
    Jul 27, 2007
    A close reading of this yields lots of stuff. Charging customers to record free shows on their rented (leased DVR) is revolutionary.

    Unless there's legislation to remove the FF button from the DVR, the commerical TV industry has got to find a way to generate revenue out of the content they produce. Networks sell ad time based upon popularity (size of viewers). But the advertizers know we blow through the commercials, so have NO IDEA how to measure whether what they're getting for their buck. Selling the shows direct to the public is gonna happen...I don't know how much it would be worth, but I'd definitely be willing to pay a premium for network shows with commercials removed.
     
  13. Dec 7, 2007 #833 of 1344
    Lord Vader

    Lord Vader Supreme Member DBSTalk Club

    8,758
    42
    Sep 20, 2004
    Galactic Empire
    Oh, come now, Earl. That's a ridiculous question. Almost none of the signals are DirecTV's; yet they provide the equipment to receive the signals that are created and beamed by others. OTA really isn't any different from the dozens of other networks/providers out there.
     
  14. Dec 7, 2007 #834 of 1344
    carl6

    carl6 Moderator Staff Member DBSTalk Club

    12,520
    958
    Nov 15, 2005
    Seattle, WA


    Obviously you meant FCC, not FAA.
    Digtal yes, high def, no. There is no mandate for high definition.
    Again, you are incorrectly mixing digital and HD. However, as HD becomes much more prevelant (and it might by Feb 2009, but then again it might not), the entire pricing scheme of cable and satellite is liable to change. No surprise there.

    That is exactly where they are at today. OTA reception and recording of HD locals is an added benefit that is only available if you subscribe to both the DVR service and the HD service. What is the surprise in this?

    Most of your educated friends assumptions appear to be focused on DirecTV revenue as a result of the customer being able to record local station service. While providing locals (both SD and HD primarily via spot beams which is what they ARE doing right now) is important, the more important revenue stream for DirecTV is all of the other probramming they offer.

    Look at DirecTV's standard definition offerings. NONE of their SD products has OTA tuners, and no one has ever made an issue out of it. We are talking about what, probably 85% of the customer base here? They get their locals just fine via spot beams, and if they have DVR service, can record them.

    DirecTV will soon have the ability to offer HD locals (via spot beams) everyplace they now offer SD locals as soon as the next satellite is operational, which should be in the first half of next year (essentially within the next six months). At that point in time, the OTA argument/requirement becomes much less significant.

    At the point in time the HR21 (which lacks OTA tuners) was on the drawing board, it's planned availability date coincided with having all local market HD offerings available via satellite. There is now a small gap in that timing, which makes the HR21 fall short, for a little while, as some of the markets that will soon have HD locals via satellite still require OTA today. Once they have HD via satellite, the OTA need on the HD equipment will be no greater than it is on the SD equipment (where it has never existed).

    Carl
     
  15. Dec 7, 2007 #835 of 1344
    Mike728

    Mike728 Icon

    511
    0
    Oct 29, 2007
    I understand your point, but since they've been doing it for so long, it's kind of expected. If it was never offered, this wouldn't be an issue.
     
  16. Dec 7, 2007 #836 of 1344
    TigerDriver

    TigerDriver Electronics Engineer

    570
    0
    Jul 27, 2007
    The answer is that they don't. But then DirecTV doesn't get to set customer demands and expectations, which are often unreasonable and inconvenient.

    If the market wants network shows in HD and wants to record them on their DVR, DirecTV will find a way to satisfy that marketing requirement. Charging extra for that capability is a perfectly legitimate approach.
     
  17. Dec 7, 2007 #837 of 1344
    Maruuk

    Maruuk Hall Of Fame

    1,951
    9
    Dec 4, 2007
    Neither do they have an obligation to provide a FF, or rewind, or even a record button on my remote. The obligation argument is circular logic, a meaningless exercise.

    They have an obligation to maintain established standards of service and utility. They failed, admitted it, and are scrambling to rectify the situation.

    But as Tiger has revealed, the smiling, obsequious Senator Palpatine of the soon-to-be-delivered USB OTA receiver will soon become the enshrouded, menacing Emperor Palpatine of the OTA PPV DTV Empire. Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi!
     
  18. Dec 7, 2007 #838 of 1344
    TigerDriver

    TigerDriver Electronics Engineer

    570
    0
    Jul 27, 2007

    A Freudian slip if there ever was one. As a pilot and an engineer, I can tell you that the FAA would never have done anything so rational as disallow ovelap in communications infrastructure.

    And of course digital is not synonymous with hi-def, but there is tight binding of the the latter to the former.

    I was pretty bleary-eyed when I finished talking.
     
  19. Dec 7, 2007 #839 of 1344
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    Actually, the FCC did allow overlap in communications infrastructure. I get both OTA Digital and OTA analogue right now. :)
     
  20. Dec 7, 2007 #840 of 1344
    TigerDriver

    TigerDriver Electronics Engineer

    570
    0
    Jul 27, 2007
    I should have said "indefinite overlap."
    I meant that the FCC declared a date at which the old technology must go extinct, not just vestigial--something the FAA doesn't do.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page