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

Second Dish Issue Surfaces in SHVIA Bill

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by Chris Blount, Apr 2, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Apr 2, 2004 #1 of 32
    Chris Blount

    Chris Blount Creator of DBSTalk Staff Member Administrator DBSTalk Gold Club

    Jun 22, 2001
    House lawmakers took the wraps off legislation aimed at reauthorizing the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act (SHVIA), which includes a proposed mandate requiring satellite TV companies to deliver local TV to consumers via a single dish.

    The legislation, introduced in the House Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee during a hearing Thursday, took aim at EchoStar's DISH Network and its offering of a number of local TV channels via a second dish for a select set of markets. The bill would give satellite TV companies deadlines to place local TV channels delivered to consumers on a single dish, but it doesn't prevent the companies from delivering other types of programming via a second dish.

    Several lawmakers offered support for the single-dish/locals item, including Rep. Charles Gonzalez (D-Texas). Gonzales said a number of stations in his home state are put on a second dish, including Spanish-language channels and programming aimed at Hispanic audiences.

    Representatives of the broadcast community testifying before the subcommittee also voiced support for the proposed mandate.

    David Moskowitz, senior vice president and general counsel at EchoStar, defended the use of a second dish for delivery of locals, saying the practice puts scarce spectrum to maximum use and allows the company to deliver local TV to a large number of markets. He also emphasized to the panel that the second dish and installation are free to consumers, and channels received on a second dish are delivered completely transparent to the viewer.

    Draft House legislation for the satellite TV law renewal also includes a mandate to modify and improve the testing and waiver process for determining availability of off-air local TV channels, used to figure out eligibility for distant network signals. The draft also provides an extension of the statutory license allowing satellite TV to deliver distant network programming, though those testifying for the satellite TV business and lawmakers suggested that satellite TV should be given a permanent license for the service.

    http://www.skyreport.com (Used with permission)
  2. Apr 2, 2004 #2 of 32

    Cyclone Hall Of Fame/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    Jul 1, 2002
    Do those Dumb asses know that you can't fit all of the locals on Dish500. I guess they'll revist this again next year when they are complaining that the SuperDish is too large.

    Maybe Charlie can get them to give him 32 DBS TPs at 105.5 or 115
  3. Apr 2, 2004 #3 of 32

    Curtis0620 Hall Of Fame

    Apr 22, 2002
    Funny that D* can do it with less TPs than E*.
  4. Apr 2, 2004 #4 of 32

    TonyM Banned User

    Aug 14, 2003
    Well, you know they had to play the ethnic card
    There are other stations on the wings, not just spanish channels.

    Also, Direct is going to do a 2 dish solution for locals. Why arent they in here?

    They may have opened up a can of worms on this
    ok...then do the following:
    -move all int'l off wings and onto 121
    -put locals on the wings (61.5 for eastern cities and 148 for western cities)

    There...problem solved. If you read above, all they are mad about is one dish for locals, use the Dish500 for all programming, and a wing for new locals.

    Also, people whine now about compression, what the hell would they say when they try to squeeze more channels on a TP so some people don't need 2 dishes on their roof?
  5. Apr 2, 2004 #5 of 32

    Curtis0620 Hall Of Fame

    Apr 22, 2002
    No, you don't understand the 2 dish issue. It's that they are spitting locals in a single market between dishes (e.g. some of NY locals are on 61.5). They can put a full market on a second dish.
  6. Apr 2, 2004 #6 of 32

    rvd420 Legend

    Mar 10, 2003
    I would allow a 2 dish solution, but I would make some changes.

    #1. If a 2nd dish is needed for locals it would HAVE to be installed at the time of initial installation (for new installs)

    #2. For current customers who have locals but need a 2nd dish, the Dish would have to be installed within 30 days. (not the call and ask like you have to now) Make it automatic.

    I don't see a problem needing 2 dishes to get all of your channels (packages an locals) but the call and ask, then wait forever B.S. has to stop.
  7. Apr 2, 2004 #7 of 32

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    Mar 23, 2002
    Put whole markets on the wing sats and be done with it. Or allow DISH and DTV to share locals at 110 and 119. Heck we might even have room for HD then
  8. Apr 2, 2004 #8 of 32

    djlong Hall Of Fame

    Jul 8, 2002
    New Hampshire
    Gee, locally, WENH and WNDS (PBS and independant) stations are on the 'wing' satellite for Boston. Gosh, those racist pigs at E*!
  9. Apr 2, 2004 #9 of 32

    scooper Hall Of Fame

    Apr 22, 2002
    Youngsville NC
    I suppose if I had to get a 61.5 Dish to get ALL my locals, I would. But right now, I get all of them on a 119 spotbeam, so a Dish500 is sufficient for me.
  10. TonyM

    TonyM Banned User

    Aug 14, 2003
    If you were directing this at me, I already know that

    When I lived in Mpls, we had our 2nd PBS (KTCI) on 61.5 ..Got the 2nd dish installed free and about 2 weeks later, they moved it to 110.
  11. TonyM

    TonyM Banned User

    Aug 14, 2003
    D* has different Spotbeam technology than E*
    They can get more on a TP
  12. FTA Michael

    FTA Michael Hall Of Fame

    Jul 21, 2002
    Thing is, there are a lot of E* subs who could get a few extra locals on a second dish, but they can't find a place to put it. The second dish requires a whole different line of sight, and that's bound to be a problem in some installations, especially apartments.

    And my guess is that there are even more people who watch the second-dish locals so infrequently that they don't want to be bothered with it at all. IMHO, it's this group that has the NAB-funded Congress in a tither.
  13. Not surprised that some of these political boobs are trying to make something so simple into something so complicated.

    Of course when you look at the tax code one shouldn't be surprised.

    We use a second Dish for some local stations, DISH came out and installed free with no charge for DISH. We live in a highly restrictive convenent community, no complaints from anyone.

    With all the problems in the world, these morons are wasting our time and money about a second Dish.

    Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid.

    Yankee born Southern bred and thinking about running for congress.
  14. pjmrt

    pjmrt Hall Of Fame

    Jul 17, 2003
    Maybe I'm a little dense, but what's the uproar about a second dish? For those local networks, Echostar comes out and provides and installs the extra dish free. Is this really some great problem that really needs our government's attention???? Maybe I can get a house bill to address the stale potato chips carried by some stores.
  15. ypsiguy

    ypsiguy Icon

    Jan 28, 2004
    This is really the solution, the present practice of Dish and D* duplicating locals is moronic. Charlie also mentioned that if Congress did away with the stupid retransmission agreements on locals, he would provide them for free. Hopefully Congress will let this happen. Only one problem on sharing though, Dish is Nagravision and D* is another system. If both are DVB, then run them FTA!!!
    Q: What's the opposite of "progress"?
    A: "Congress"
  16. Tyralak

    Tyralak Icon

    Jan 24, 2004
    These nimrods must think E* is staffed by magicians. Somehow they can bend the laws of physics regarding how much data can be squeezed onto a carrier wave. :rolleyes:

    This is just going to make things worse. Heavier compression, maybe some dropped channels. This is bad news.
  17. Tyralak

    Tyralak Icon

    Jan 24, 2004
    Of course they did. It's the sleazy political thing to do.

    That's what I've been saying all along. Move all the locals off the main birds, send them to 61.5 or 148. Easy.
  18. ericha

    ericha AllStar

    Jan 20, 2003
    One small problem with moving all the locals to the wing birds--there are no spot beam antennas there. You can't just move the main birds, that would interrupt programming. I also suspect that the "look angle" to the continental US would make a spot beam antenna design very difficult.
  19. Chris Freeland

    Chris Freeland Hall Of Fame

    Mar 23, 2002
    If the government give's E* the time needed to launch E10 to 110 in 05, and if E* adds a 3rd up-link center, they should not have any problem moving all wing locals to spotbeams. I suspect E* will be forced to do this because what the broadcasters want, the broadcasters generally get, they are that powerful. :(
  20. Mike D-CO5

    Mike D-CO5 Hall Of Fame

    Mar 11, 2003
    The only reason why Dish chose this 2 dish situation that split the main networks from the religious and Mexican stations was out of spite for the FCC and the Must Carry Rules. Charlie only wanted to carry the big 4 networks in each city and use the super stations pack for the rest. This would allow Dish to make extra money off each locals pack with bundled prices of 8.99 for the locals and superstations ( WB and UPN). The must carry rules where if you carry one station in a town you must carry all stations in the town if the other stations request it. This irked old Charlie so he decided to make it nearly impossible to get the other channels by splitting them off and putting them on the side sats. I don't think there is anything wrong with using the 2 dish solution but they should keep all the channels in a locals pack together on one satellite dish. The FCC has not been happy with Charlie since he started this convoluted 2 dish situation but they have looked the other way since Dish will install at the customer's request, a free dish for the few channels on the side sats. IN this way Charlie was getting to add just the big networks and he kept the other must carry channels on the lesser viewed side satellites. I just don't want the picture quality of my locals to suffer in order to make the FCC happy. I agree they should wait till Dish gets a few more sats up and a new uplink center and then they should give Dish a deadline to get all the locals in a pack on the same satellite dish.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page