Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Frank Coluccio Technology Forum - ASAP -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ftth who wrote (147)	10/30/1999 8:25:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 1782

Dave, and Wonk, great discussion and a good refresher as to the issues in this space. I can see where the vested interests will have a hand in attempting to mold the outcome, and present the greater possibility of stunting progress. Dave, your point about the inevitability of the 'content' approach is well taken, as is your point about the insignificance of over the air terrestrial these days. From my water line in Brooklyn NY, a block away on Shore Road, I can reach out and tap the antennae atop the World Trade Center. But in ten years that I'm living here, I've never had rabbit ears or rooftop reception, yet. Once, during a TWX outage, I fashioned a rabbit ears rig out of a clothes hanger, about two years ago. Come to think of it, Dave, I haven't had an oppotunity to watch TV ever since you created this forum... Regards, Frank Coluccio Please don't forget my question re digital over fiber to the neighborhood/home.. thx

To: ftth who wrote (147)	10/30/1999 10:37:00 PM
From: wonk	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1782

Dave: Notwithstanding that I haven't kept up with HDTV, the Sinclair petition invoked a visceral reaction. Perhaps I've spent to many years in wireless telecom. I come from a broadcasting family; rabbit ears on the crib. I could tell you a story about 45' of vaporized inner conductor on a 6" transmission line - where I met a very young, though older than me, Dave Smith, now head of Sinclair, who came to commiserate, help or admonish by mere presence - because the facility in question had not purchased a Comark transmitter. Since terrestrial delivery isn't the primary reception method for the masses in the US (especially for those that need huge choices of movies), I'm not sure it's such a huge impact. Terrestrial delivery as the primary means of TV reception (via rabbit ears or outside antenna) has been in steep decline since the mid 80's. Far more broadcast network content is received via cable or satellite that via the rabbit ears. BEGIN RANT I've been away too long to quote statistics, and hence I won't debate how the majority of content is delivered. The statistic demands a definition: broadcast network content versus non broadcast network content; versus local content. The local television station whether it be affiliate or indy, continues to be a significant part of the local community. People do watch their local station. People do demand the local stations on cable. While the DAB Industry has taken off in the past couple of years, it has never achieved what its supporters expected it to achieve in terms of penetration. Why? Because head-to-head against cable, the wire has the local stations. Let the locals go dark - delivering programming only via cable and what happens to satellite? It becomes a niche service. Satellite has advanced in recent years not only due to the change in price, content and ergonomics of the receiver - but also because of the continuing availability and ease of reception of local stations. Ask yourself a simple question, if every single local station pulled re-transmission consent, if simultaneously the broadcast networks refused to allow their programming to be transmitted by cable or satellite, how precipitously would the penetration for these services drop? While a majority of households now have cable or satellite, there still is a large percentage of cable households who only take the basic tier, which provides a glimpse as to how many people still only need the local. I could be wrong, but I don't think receiving over-air broadcasts will be the prime driver for people to buy an HDTV-capable set (especially at initial prices of over 2000 bucks). It sure wont be for me.... People can get their "high definition" fix in many ways: via cable, wireless cable, DBS, or even from renting/buying DVD's (so it isn't limited to "television" in the traditional sense). Maybe we need to stop referring to it as HD "TV" since it's much broader than that. It's high definition "content." In the abstract I agree. I don't need HDTV for the local news. However, we are dealing with a chicken or egg situation here. Cable and satellite can do HDTV or HD content. They could have done it 20 years ago. But they won't - not on their own hook - not until the viewing public demands it. They won't for the simple reason that HDTV consumes bandwidth. They have to take revenue generating services, or services which are competitive differentiators offline to provide high definition. The national networks and the local broadcasters are the first order customers of content. Their needs will drive the Industry. While you could argue that most HH have cable or satellite, how many hookups does that entail. How many TV's are in your home? What about the TV at the ballgame, the beach, on the patio in the summertime. If these traditional means of reception no longer work, then the local broadcaster starts to die; which means the broadcast network starts to die; which means they won't support the technology; which means they won't demand content; which means the content won't get delivered because there is not a large enough impetus (read dollars) outside of broadcasting to make it happen in the face of their ambivalence. Look at AM stereo; the content was there. The Commission even took a laissez faire attitude regarding technical standards. The problem was that of the four competing technical alternatives (1) one manufacturer was able to dominate the marketplace or drive out their competitors and (2) their system scked. So the radio broadcasters never got behind it. There will always be a need for local television - untethered* by a wire or a dish. If the industry and the Commission continue on their present course I see only two outcomes - both bad: (1) a bad standard kills local broadcasting - definite net loss for the nation or (2) broadcasters abandon the effort because they see the risk to their franchise and hence HD content is long, long delayed. END RANT ww p.s. Sorry, I got too tired to discuss the now demonstrated technical prowess of of COFDM.