Who Won, Who Lost With The Digital Transition?

[vibe]

First of all I have cable in MA and at a property in FLA. The cable in Fla costs about $250 yr-extended basic. This is a rate negotiated by our HOA and the cable Company and due to the fact that about 2/3 of the property owners are snowbirds.
But how long for that sweet deal? The cable company stopped proving a discounted rate at the MH park across the street so it's only a question of time. Besides I HATE paying for something that is free in part, at least the OTA's. So I'm seriously thinking of dumping cable.
My sis and bro in law have 2 properties in CT and MA. One is a hilltop (south facing) location about 10-15 mi SW of Springfield CT. They currently get more stations than before the transition inc 3,18, 20,22,24,30, 61. Before this they got most of those stations including a snowy ch 8.
They would like to get the digital ABC from either New haven or Holyoke but New Haven ABC digital is apparently too far (45 mi) and on VHF and can't get 40 due to a 200 ft hill in their backyard.
They were happy with their OTA but in Clinton Ct (at sea level) they now get only 3 stations a shopping channel, channel 49 and 59. No ch 8 no networks. They don't want a big antenna on the roof but I told them it's either that or cable/satelite. But it's a rustic vacation cottage and not used very much. They use rabbit ears. I told them they cannot make lemonaide without the lemons.
So they gained in one area and lost in another. They live about 25-45 mi from the transmitters.
So what about your situation? Did you gain or lose stations? If you gained stations or kept the status quo, did this require a new antenna? Are the new antennas of today inferior or superior to the ones made 20-30 yrs ago?

 

[landtuna]

Here in the Phoenix market the digital conversion brought us a whole host of new stations. But with the exception of RTV, 3 weather loops and a couple of public television offerings they are either Spanish-language, infomercial or religious - a waste in my household.

I watch some RTV. KAET 8.3 (PBS World) has some interesting shows too. But nobody in Phoenix needs a 24-hour weather loop.

I've give the digital conversion a slight "won" offset by the increased complexity and maintenance required to bring their signals into the house. Oh yeah, two of my sets are pretty old and both have "like new" pictures.

 

[gr8oldies]

Other than some issues with indoor reception, we gained My TV, 7 Weather Now which is useful and also is a dumping ground for sports they don't want top run on the main channel. (WHIO, 7..RF 41 Dayton OH). We get five PBS's, the main feed. a feed where the rerun everything from the previous night, the Ohio Channel (All Ohio Supreme Court, all the time) and an extra kid channel. 2, 22 and 26 (pretend channels) don't have any additional program offerings.

 

[Darth_vader]

I gained KORS-CA on 16 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KORS-CA) which reportedly upped its power to 3000 watts last week. I also "gained" KPDX when they moved it to 30 (had huge reception problems on 48. That's actually to be expected when you take into account I can get a nice, clear shot of KUNP-LP on 47, and KPDX used to have its NTSC broadcast on 49.) The only ATSC mux I can't get is KNMT on 45. Can't really say I miss it!

The receivers are a Digitalstream and the behemoth Pansat PS9200HD DVB-S/QAM/ATSC rig. (I also acquired a BEC DBS-2000 sat box from Goodwill last week, but it doesn't have an ATSC section. Damn. ;o) My current antenna is an almost 30-year old rabit ear, bow tie and loop setup that my Father assembled eons ago from seperate antennae purchased from Hi-School Pharmacy, running through a splitter into both the Pansat and Digitalstream boxen. I don't have an amplifier, however, big sheets of tinfoil can be observed attached to the ends of the rabbit ears.

I have a decent line of sight of the transmitter towers in Portland's west hills. Obstructions are mainly limited to trees in the vicinity of the complex as well as a heavily-forested island in the Columbia River on which Interstate 205 runs across. I am also in the approach path of PDX Airport. Guess I don't need to explain that further! ;o) Fortunately I haven't had a lot of trouble with that.

 

[BRNout]

My guess is that it's probably a win to folks who live in big western cities that are located in basins/valleys which are served by high powered stations transmitting from the surrounding mountains. And, these are also places which have little interference from neighboring markets. Places like Salt Lake, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Las Vegas, Albuquerque, Denver and Portland come to mind. Another set of winners would be folks in big markets located in relatively level areas that have big signal stations from high towers. Dallas/Ft. Worth, Houston, Kansas City and Oklahoma City are the first I'd think of in this category.

Categories 1 and 2 tend to be places where their local stations can blanket a strong signal over most of their respective markets - at least the populated areas.

And, winning group #3 are the cable and satellite providers who will undoubtedly be picking up a slew of new customers who just lost a chunk of their over the air reception.

Losers?

Most people previously served by indoor antennas in eastern suburbs (or the Bay Area and Puget Sound market) without a direct line of sight to the tx sites, folks in exurbs and hilly areas (unless you're at the top of the hill). Even some with outdoor antennas in fringe areas. Those who like to use portable TVs or who have TVs at their vacation homes which use an antenna. For example, if you have a camp by a lake in Maine (and many do) your formerly snowy reception of channels 6, 8 and 13 was almost certainly replaced by nothing.

In other words, there are a lot more losers here than winners.

 

[Sammi Brie]

My guess is that it's probably a win to folks who live in big western cities that are located in basins/valleys which are served by high powered stations transmitting from the surrounding mountains. And, these are also places which have little interference from neighboring markets. Places like Salt Lake, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Las Vegas, Albuquerque, Denver and Portland come to mind. Another set of winners would be folks in big markets located in relatively level areas that have big signal stations from high towers. Dallas/Ft. Worth, Houston, Kansas City and Oklahoma City are the first I'd think of in this category.

Categories 1 and 2 tend to be places where their local stations can blanket a strong signal over most of their respective markets - at least the populated areas.

And, winning group #3 are the cable and satellite providers who will undoubtedly be picking up a slew of new customers who just lost a chunk of their over the air reception.

Losers?

Most people previously served by indoor antennas in eastern suburbs (or the Bay Area and Puget Sound market) without a direct line of sight to the tx sites, folks in exurbs and hilly areas (unless you're at the top of the hill). Even some with outdoor antennas in fringe areas. Those who like to use portable TVs or who have TVs at their vacation homes which use an antenna. For example, if you have a camp by a lake in Maine (and many do) your formerly snowy reception of channels 6, 8 and 13 was almost certainly replaced by nothing.

In other words, there are a lot more losers here than winners.

In Arizona, the investment in LPTV digital is huge - and for good reason. Better coverage areas. In fact, my area will get OTA coverage from a station 30 miles to the south. Its analog only covers one small city, but they have an app for a very powerful (15 kW, the max) digital. Other stations already at the antenna farm will get much better coverage. Full-powers are losing strength, but the LPTV is a little more powerful now.

 

[crainbebo]

Big win for me. Started getting E-skip and canadian stations here in Bothell, WA, with only KING 5 (nightlight), and KBTC 28 (NAB nightlight) on the air!

-crainbebo

 

[BobOnTheJob]

Losers....almost everyone more than 55-60 miles from a TV market. The folks who've been happy with snowy analog for decades have been given the shaft. Guess we need a "No Viewer Left Behind" government bailout...

 

[vibe]

It looks as if lots of viewers are left behind. Many city/surburban dwellers will surely gain once the kinks are worked out. I know many of these people can afford cable/satelite but there are still lots of people living in rural/very fringe areas an hour away (or more) from their nearest markets. areas on super tight budgets or with very limited incomes. If someone is working a $7.00 hr McJob,(and I've worked those) they may have to end up working at least a full day to pay for something that was free in the past. And if someone has the misfortune to be on a disability fixed income, the cable/sat. nut could represent 10% (or possibly more) of their gross income. I guess one could get basic cable but that cost is going up rather quickly.
And many of THEIR voices are not heard on forums such as this.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

Losers....almost everyone more than 55-60 miles from a TV market. The folks who've been happy with snowy analog for decades have been given the shaft. Guess we need a "No Viewer Left Behind" government bailout...

And anybody relying on the coverage a low band TV station provided. Especially channel 2's, which could really reach far beyond the cities they served deep into fringes. Those viewers, some of which were a hundred miles or more from any other TV station, really don't have much luck at all with high band VHF or UHF.

And the spectrum freed up? Auctioned for a miniscule amount compared to the 3.2 trillion in debt racked up since the beginning of the year.
Really doesn't make sense when you think of it. Broadband internet in the car, anywhere in the country will be nice, though. For streaming so you don't have to listen to the awful selection of stations available over the air.

 

[vibe]

maybe the taxpayer willl get fair market value when we have to sell the Grand Canyon.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

maybe the taxpayer willl get fair market value when we have to sell the Grand Canyon.

Why sell? Just rent advertising space on the canyon walls. That is prime location for billboard ads or spray painted on the rock. And we could do that in all national parks and monuments. There is a lot of underutilized ad space on the Washington monument, capital building, etc. You fill it all with ads, it could be worth billions each year. If we fill it with a lot of HD radio ads, I bet we could sell that million HD radios they talk about.

 

[radioman148]

Great idea advertising in the Grand Canyon. Lots of planes fly over there.

 

[gr8oldies]

The Coors Lite Grand Canyon

 

[stormy01]

The Coors Lite Grand Canyon

Keep it local.

Great idea advertising in the Grand Canyon. Lots of planes fly over there.

A few thousand a day probably go over the Grand Canyon in a plane...how big will they have to make the signs? Or how low must the plane fly? (;

I'm sure the environmentalists will get of hold of this one...

 

[radioman148]

The Coors Lite Grand Canyon

Keep it local.

Great idea advertising in the Grand Canyon. Lots of planes fly over there.

A few thousand a day probably go over the Grand Canyon in a plane...how big will they have to make the signs? Or how low must the plane fly? (;

I'm sure the environmentalists will get of hold of this one...

Yeah but ask any politician--money talks!

 

[KeithE4]

The Coors Lite Grand Canyon

Keep it local.

The Bubbaganoush Pale Ale Grand Canyon. ;D

(Bubbaganoush Pale Ale is made by the Flagstaff Brewing Co., the closest brewery to the Grand Canyon.)