What percentage of Americans watch television over-the-air? I am curious because it is my understanding that restrictions on outdoor antennas are not permitted there, while such restrictions are commonplace in Canada, where OTA viewing is in the neighbourhood of 10-16%.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
OTA statistics
- Thread starter mjlarochelle
- Start date
M.J. said:
Restrictions on outside antennas are very common in newer (built after 1980 or so) housing developments, thanks to Homeowners' Associations (HOAs). In many cases satellite dishes are legal only if they can't be seen from the street. TV antennas are OK only if they're not installed outside (such as in the attic).
The percentage of households with cable and/or satellite TV is now somewhere around 80% in the U.S, making it about 20% with strictly OTA viewers. It depends on what part of the country we're talking about, though. Some areas have more than others.
Another thing to consider is that 80-85% is a national average. In some markets like San Diego cable penetration is higher. Some it is lower. Also a lot of homes have some TV sets hooked to cable and some (such in the kitchen) relying on OTA.
The FCC has put limits on what a homeowner association can and cannot do with regards to antennas. Some restrictions on antennas are allowed, but most are not. You can go to fcc.gov to get a list of acceptable restrictions.
Most HOA and apt complexes used to have one large master antenna. Thus eliminating the need for a lot of smaller ones. Now that isn't common.
The FCC has put limits on what a homeowner association can and cannot do with regards to antennas. Some restrictions on antennas are allowed, but most are not. You can go to fcc.gov to get a list of acceptable restrictions.
Most HOA and apt complexes used to have one large master antenna. Thus eliminating the need for a lot of smaller ones. Now that isn't common.
Here's a link to a list of the cable and satellite (or other type of service) penetration in each market in the country:
http://www.tvb.org/rcentral/markettrack/Cable_and_ADS_Penetration_by_DMA.asp
You can see that the 80-85% number is on target.
http://www.tvb.org/rcentral/markettrack/Cable_and_ADS_Penetration_by_DMA.asp
You can see that the 80-85% number is on target.
More rural towns the further west you go. Lots of cable companies are and have been unwilling to wire (or upgrade) smaller towns because they won't see the ROI.
Here in Starkville, MS we have an absolutely horrible cable company that has no interest in upgrading to true digital cable despite being a college town with a full-time population of about 22,000 (ballooning to about 35,000 during the school year). Meanwhile, the next town over, population approximately 14,000, has PNS' CableOne system with true digital. Unless people specifically want cable modem over dsl, I see most going with either Dish Network or DirecTV.
Here in Starkville, MS we have an absolutely horrible cable company that has no interest in upgrading to true digital cable despite being a college town with a full-time population of about 22,000 (ballooning to about 35,000 during the school year). Meanwhile, the next town over, population approximately 14,000, has PNS' CableOne system with true digital. Unless people specifically want cable modem over dsl, I see most going with either Dish Network or DirecTV.
"Looks like there are very few markets under 75% total cable/satellite. Makes me wonder why stations in the markets with 90% and up are even bothering to broadcast over the air anymore since few are actually viewing the signal from the tower."
Those are household percentages, so there still are the TVs in the kitchen, etc, not hooked up to cable.
But you make a good point. In small towns and rural areas, the percentage may actually be higher... the cable systems may not be good or in rural areas non-existant, but you will see an awful lot of dishes.
In my market, Sioux City, the Fox and CBS stations went together a few years ago to put up a 2000 foot tower. (The CBS had been on a 1000 foot, the Fox was a new station.) I wonder if it was worth the expense, considering the locals are now carried by Dish Network plus every cable system.
Those are household percentages, so there still are the TVs in the kitchen, etc, not hooked up to cable.
But you make a good point. In small towns and rural areas, the percentage may actually be higher... the cable systems may not be good or in rural areas non-existant, but you will see an awful lot of dishes.
In my market, Sioux City, the Fox and CBS stations went together a few years ago to put up a 2000 foot tower. (The CBS had been on a 1000 foot, the Fox was a new station.) I wonder if it was worth the expense, considering the locals are now carried by Dish Network plus every cable system.
One of the things I question is the inclusion of the SMATV. Because in larger cities like NYC and Chicago, I have friends in high rises that have their TV connected via this but unless they pay MORE they still only get the OTA television stations. And these people don't pay for anything more but yet they are lumped in with cable.
I guess in a way it does make sense to put them in with the wired group but in a way it also misleads because it makes you think they are getting more more channels, when essentially all it is is a master antenna for over the air reception.
I still get a kick out of all the stores still selling analog sets this Christmas. Hmmm lot of people are going to be mad soon.
I guess in a way it does make sense to put them in with the wired group but in a way it also misleads because it makes you think they are getting more more channels, when essentially all it is is a master antenna for over the air reception.
I still get a kick out of all the stores still selling analog sets this Christmas. Hmmm lot of people are going to be mad soon.
Also, are there not many people who use both OTA for locals and Dish for everything else? Last time I looked, local CBS, NBC, etc. was still a $5 extra charge.
One issue that may exist with the accuracy of these numbers is the matter of how they can't non-household cable & satellite subscriptions -- ie, restaurants, bars, retail establishments, and dormitories. As a result of miscounting these subscribers towards the household percentages, I have read some credible claims that cable/satellite penetration rates are somewhat exaggerated, and may be closer to a combined 80% versus the 85% that is commonly claimed.
Excellent point about people w/ satelite still going OTA for their locals. Plus there's
a lot of people are upset about losing OTA channels on cable (usually in favor of a shopping, foreign language, or religious channel) at a time when rates are increasing and the economy in slow decline, one can argue that the % of cable households have reached their threshold. Even though we have cable, I keep an extra TV in the breezeway to watch 5 other local stations that are not on the cable lineup these staions (ABC 6, cbs 12, upn 28, pbs 36, and fox 64 all providence-new Bedford RI) arte all receivable w/ rabbit ears and a 99 cent loop antenna. Where I used to live we had over 20 OTA stations besides the ones on the cable lineup (we lived on a hill). The cable company, for some reason does not carry the Providence channels except for nbc 10 as they are duplicates of the provided Boston channels from a further distance I might add. So although we are clearly a cable HH we rely on OTA particularly when
the NFL games are different or if a Boston channel prempts network programming for a locally produced show.
Do these stas include the undocumented 10-20 million people in this country at this time, many undoubtedly relying on OTA?
Plus a lot of people who are cable/satelite subscribers have motor homes and camp and although they rely on cable/satelite at homes, many of their campers have just a few OTA stations. Some of these people are on the road a good part of the year; they rely on OTA.
Finally, if you speak w/ realtors, there's about 3-5% of all housing units that are vacant at any time. When the cable/sat industry says they have 95% coverage in a given market, that means they are implying (or lying) that EVERYONE has cable or sat.
a lot of people are upset about losing OTA channels on cable (usually in favor of a shopping, foreign language, or religious channel) at a time when rates are increasing and the economy in slow decline, one can argue that the % of cable households have reached their threshold. Even though we have cable, I keep an extra TV in the breezeway to watch 5 other local stations that are not on the cable lineup these staions (ABC 6, cbs 12, upn 28, pbs 36, and fox 64 all providence-new Bedford RI) arte all receivable w/ rabbit ears and a 99 cent loop antenna. Where I used to live we had over 20 OTA stations besides the ones on the cable lineup (we lived on a hill). The cable company, for some reason does not carry the Providence channels except for nbc 10 as they are duplicates of the provided Boston channels from a further distance I might add. So although we are clearly a cable HH we rely on OTA particularly when
the NFL games are different or if a Boston channel prempts network programming for a locally produced show.
Do these stas include the undocumented 10-20 million people in this country at this time, many undoubtedly relying on OTA?
Plus a lot of people who are cable/satelite subscribers have motor homes and camp and although they rely on cable/satelite at homes, many of their campers have just a few OTA stations. Some of these people are on the road a good part of the year; they rely on OTA.
Finally, if you speak w/ realtors, there's about 3-5% of all housing units that are vacant at any time. When the cable/sat industry says they have 95% coverage in a given market, that means they are implying (or lying) that EVERYONE has cable or sat.
Good responses. I would not be surprised if large networks, especially in Canada, are manipulating actual statistics to further their long-term agenda of getting rid of OTA transmission. I would take a stab at the actual stats in many urban locations across North America is 20% OTA. The number of cable and satellite subscriptions is easier to measure, but those stats don't measure those who have OTA on one TV and cable on the other. Many people, especially young people, have lost awareness of OTA. I remember last summer I spoke with several people that wanted to watch Canadian Idol but didn't because they had no cable or satellite and thought CTV wasn't available without cable or satellite. Cable and satellite has been crammed down peoples' throats by the service providers, and they have succeeded at convincing people to pay huge amounts of money for crap when they don't have to.
I will never pay for cable or satellite, and I will get an outdoor antenna. I don't care what the local regulations are, because outdoor antennas are allowed in other parts of the city and it is my right to not have to pay Ted Rogers to get local television.
I will never pay for cable or satellite, and I will get an outdoor antenna. I don't care what the local regulations are, because outdoor antennas are allowed in other parts of the city and it is my right to not have to pay Ted Rogers to get local television.
Re: OTA statistics-hope I didn't go off post
Hope you can stick to your convictions, I felt the same way when I was younger. If one manages to avoid cable for their lifetime one can save at least $50/60 a month or $660 yr yr. IF a person at age 21 eschews cable for 5 yrs there would be about $3300 to bank or invest which if untouched, should increase over the years. Time is on your side, yes it is.
I'm not a financial person or advisor; check w/ professionals for advice.this not just an opinion of a person who has been nickeled and dimed by cable who could have done things differently but there are no mulligans, eh! Dollars not spent when you're 50 aren't a big deal but when you're 21, the choices you make have such major long term rewards or consequenses.
Hope you can stick to your convictions, I felt the same way when I was younger. If one manages to avoid cable for their lifetime one can save at least $50/60 a month or $660 yr yr. IF a person at age 21 eschews cable for 5 yrs there would be about $3300 to bank or invest which if untouched, should increase over the years. Time is on your side, yes it is.
I'm not a financial person or advisor; check w/ professionals for advice.this not just an opinion of a person who has been nickeled and dimed by cable who could have done things differently but there are no mulligans, eh! Dollars not spent when you're 50 aren't a big deal but when you're 21, the choices you make have such major long term rewards or consequenses.
We are actually going backwards here, starting next week we are dropping Directv and going with antenna for local/networks and using DVB (free to air) satellite to fill the gaps. We decided to do this when we realized that we watched mostly network tv, we used to watch allot of the non-ota (cable type channels) but have slowly stopped watching so we decided to save the $60 a month we where spending on Directv and go OTA. I will admit I am going to miss my tivo though.
8
8638
Guest
I fired my cable company (Comcast) in May of 2002, when the price for 'expanded basic' broke 40 bucks a month. I thought about it at that point, and realized I watched mostly network and PBS broadcasts. So, I beefed up my outdoor antenna installation with a Channel Master preamp and an excellent distribution amplifier that I purchased reasonably on eBay (I'm in a far fringe area, and needed these items to punch the signal to a consistently viewable level). Now, almost 5 years later, Comcast extorts neary 55 bucks a month for their expanded basic service. I've saved a boatload of real money, that I can use for other stuff.
It is true, though, that people think they need cable to watch television. People look at me funny when I tell 'em I don't have cable...but they don't think it's funny when I tell them how much money I save!
It is true, though, that people think they need cable to watch television. People look at me funny when I tell 'em I don't have cable...but they don't think it's funny when I tell them how much money I save!
its funny, My dad has HDTV and he has Directv and was always saying how poor the picture looked (HD Lite), so I got him an antenna installed for his birthday and he spends most of his time watching the antenna now, so much so that he is talking about droping Directv and going antenna only. Funny thing is the antenna guy had a waiting list becouse he is so busy (I would guess mostly becouse of HD) and this is in Atlanta...I was suprised to hear that but it got me thinking and now we are going to take the money we save from dumping Directv and save it for a nice vacation.
- Status