Why aren't small market stations upgrading to HD as quickly as they should?

[AKA]

I live in the Chico/Redding, California media market (DMA #130). We have a co-owned CBS/NBC affiliate duopoly, an ABC station, and a Fox/MyNetworkTV duopoly. The CW is available solely as a "CW+" subchannel on our CBS station, and up until a few years ago, MyNetworkTV was a subchannel on our Fox affiliate..

Currently, we receive all available network programming in high definition, with the exception of MyNetworkTV (is that really a "network," anyway?) and The CW. Both local news operations in the market (CBS/NBC and ABC) are amateurish at best, and are produced and broadcast in very muddy-looking SD. I moved here from Spokane, Washington (DMA #77) in 2007, and was shocked at how technologically behind-the times the Chico/Redding stations are. It was like going back in time 25 years.

The only stations that have the capability to air syndicated programming in HD are the aforementioned CBS/NBC duopoly. If your favorite syndicated show airs on the ABC, Fox, CW or MyNetworkTV stations, though, you're out-of-luck if you want to watch it in high definition, even though that show is more-than-likely produced and/or distributed in HD in most of the country.

I'm sure this story isn't the exception when it comes to tiny-market television. What's holding these small stations back from entering the twenty-first century, or at the very least, least leaving the 1980s behind? Is it a lack of funds? Is it stubborn station managers who feel the expensive video equipment they bought back in 199? isn't quite due for an upgrade just yet? Or do the powers that be just believe that the viewers in small markets don't notice or care about these things?

I have a very nice, but expensive Sharp Aquos 47" HDTV. I'm disabled and on a fixed income, so the cash I spent on the set was a lot of money to me. That being the case, I'd like to watch high definition programming on my high definition television, not something that looks like it's being played on a 2-head VCR in SLP/EP mode with tracking issues.

 

[fybush]

It costs a lot of money to upgrade a local station's entire airchain to pass HD, and it's not much cheaper for a small-market station to do it than it is for the big guys. Everything has to be replaced - automation systems, storage, master control switcher, and if you want to do news in HD, then you also need new field and studio cameras, new editing systems, new graphics (news and weather), and more likely than not a new set and lighting.

Even for the smallest of small-market stations, you're easily looking at a six-figure investment. It's a much more expensive proposition than just passing live network content in HD (which I think the networks now mandate anyway.) w9wi can probably chime in with a better estimate of the costs involved.

If you're running a small station like KRCR or KHSL, can you justify that kind of investment? It can be hard to attribute a direct financial return to an HD conversion. Here in my somewhat larger small market (Rochester NY, #80-ish), only one of our local commercial stations does news in HD, and after a little more than a year doing it, it doesn't appear to have resulted in any kind of measurable ratings advantage (the station, WHAM-TV, was in a tight battle for #1 before going HD and is still in a tight battle for #1 in most dayparts.)

Nobody else in town does local news or very much syndicated content in HD at all, and they probably won't do so any time very soon, from what I hear.

 

[w9wi]

It's probably a lack of funds.

It's relatively simple to convert to pass through network programming in HD. Of course, the station already has to have a digital transmitter, and the network satellite receiver already delivers the network in HD. Install a HD MPEG encoder and some kind of HD 2:1 router and a SD=>HD upconverter for the local side, and you're in business.

Passing syndicated material in HD requires replacing the playout server, the MCR switcher, and the satellite receiver(s) used to downlink the shows. Quite likely, the routing switcher and a bunch of the distribution equipment will also need replacement. And some monitoring gear. And some downconverters so you can get material out for those parts of the station that still can't handle HD. (like the newsroom)

 

[w9wi]

It costs a lot of money to upgrade a local station's entire airchain to pass HD, and it's not much cheaper for a small-market station to do it than it is for the big guys. Everything has to be replaced - automation systems, storage, master control switcher, and if you want to do news in HD, then you also need new field and studio cameras, new editing systems, new graphics (news and weather), and more likely than not a new set and lighting.

Even for the smallest of small-market stations, you're easily looking at a six-figure investment. It's a much more expensive proposition than just passing live network content in HD (which I think the networks now mandate anyway.) w9wi can probably chime in with a better estimate of the costs involved.

If you're running a small station like KRCR or KHSL, can you justify that kind of investment? It can be hard to attribute a direct financial return to an HD conversion. Here in my somewhat larger small market (Rochester NY, #80-ish), only one of our local commercial stations does news in HD, and after a little more than a year doing it, it doesn't appear to have resulted in any kind of measurable ratings advantage (the station, WHAM-TV, was in a tight battle for #1 before going HD and is still in a tight battle for #1 in most dayparts.)

Nobody else in town does local news or very much syndicated content in HD at all, and they probably won't do so any time very soon, from what I hear.

Well, shoot. Scott & I were answering your question simultaneously

He is, as usual, correct on all counts I can't really be much more specific than Scott ("six-figures") -- I'd say probably on the order of low-mid six figures in most cases depending on the exact infrastructure that already exists.

I'm not considering here the cost of doing local news in HD. That's another new investment of similar size.

Your local stations *will* convert eventually. They'll do it as existing equipment reaches end-of-life & needs replacement.

 

[landtuna]

Question for the experts:

Why would any station but a "big market network affiliate" even consider doing news in HD?

I can readily understand the investment paying off for things like live sports, movies and the like but for news (where live shots are normally not HD-friendly) or talking head drones???

News in HD makes about as much financial sense in most markets as does the operation of a "news chopper".

Counterpoint?

 

[danikayser84]

In Albany, WNYT (NBC affiliate owned by Hubbard) is still running their news in 4:3 SD, and last I remember WXXA (FOX, Newport) is in 16:9 widescreen (not HD)... WTEN and WRGB are both in HD for local news/programming...

As far as I know, all the network affiliates here are in 720p/1080i HD for network programming (not downscaled to widescreen EDTV)... no independents to speak of here either

 

[fybush]

News in HD makes about as much financial sense in most markets as does the operation of a "news chopper".

Counterpoint?

Even leaving the SD-to-HD conversion aside, TV production equipment has a relatively short life cycle. If you can get 15 years out of a field camera or a production switcher or an effects generator, you're probably pretty lucky.

16:9 HD is rapidly becoming the standard for all TV production, and as with anything that becomes the standard, the economics of the equipment market will make it prohibitively expensive, sooner or later, to buy gear that's non-standard.

I expect that if I have time to wander away from the radio part of the show floor in a week's time at the NAB convention, close to 100% of what's being exhibited by TV/video production vendors will be HD.

So as w9wi correctly suggests up above, as existing SD plants hit the end-of-life for their equipment, the cost of replacing SD with SD will soon end up being higher than replacing SD with HD. It may be there already. It appears that one of the remaining all-SD shops in my market is keeping its elderly SD gear alive much longer than it really should, at least judging by the tape dropouts that are a regular feature of its news video.

We're already seeing brand-new news operations, even in the smallest market, launching their new plants in HD. I'm not sure you could build a new SD analog plant from scratch now if you wanted to.

There was a sense early on that an "early adopter" of local HD in a smaller market could build viewer loyalty among (presumably higher-income, more attractive to advertisers) early technology adopters seeking as much HD content for their new HD sets as possible. If that did in fact prove to be a ratings advantage for some of the smaller-market stations that went HD for local news early on, I haven't seen much evidence of it.

 

[AKA]

Wow! Thanks for the prompt, thoughtful responses, everyone. I've long suspected that it's mostly (or entirely) economics preventing these smaller stations from converting to HD. There is no doubt in my mind that such upgrades would be nothing short of expensive. Still, wouldn't it be in the stations' best interests to bring production values up-to-date, no matter what the cost? I would think that doing so would give them more viewers and higher advertising revenue, and probably a better relationship with the networks. I have to believe that by 2012, networks are putting pressure on stations to upgrade sooner rather than later (if I was ABC, I wouldn't want the lead-in to my prime time lineup to be a muddy-looking episode of The Insider).

 

[fybush]

It's all about the money. Owning a local TV station used to be the proverbial license to print money...but the cost of the DTV transmission conversion was a huge burden for small stations, especially coming as it did during an economic downturn. Many smaller stations are still recovering from that capital expenditure (again, easily into six figures and often closer to seven, especially if a new tower was required), and as attractive as HD local production might be, the money's just not there for many of them to do it.

 

[AKA]

Makes sense. Thanks a million for the wonderful insight!

 

[nomadcowatbk]

Small lack stations just don't have the capital of bigger markets, but they also monopolies due to syndex laws. There's no need for them to go HD. Even stations in bigger markets aren't fully HD. Fox 4 in Kansas City can't display weather warnings or snow closings without turning off the Fox network HD and they broadcast only in 2 channel audio during local programming.

 

[nomadcowatbk]

It costs a lot of money to upgrade a local station's entire airchain to pass HD, and it's not much cheaper for a small-market station to do it than it is for the big guys. Everything has to be replaced - automation systems, storage, master control switcher, and if you want to do news in HD, then you also need new field and studio cameras, new editing systems, new graphics (news and weather), and more likely than not a new set and lighting.

And better makeup for older anchors ;D

 

[nomadcowatbk]

Your local stations *will* convert eventually. They'll do it as existing equipment reaches end-of-life & needs replacement.

Or they might just buy the used SD equipment that a bigger market stations get rid when they go HD.

 

[fybush]

Or they might just buy the used SD equipment that a bigger market stations get rid when they go HD.

Ever seen what that stuff looks like by the time it's put in 10 or 15 years of nonstop service at a large-market station? We're no longer talking about the old RCA or GE or Ampex gear that was built to last forever. We're talking about solid-state stuff built to last...oh, 10 or 15 years.

The term "end-of-life" didn't come around by accident. (And that's not even getting into the question of finding parts, or finding tape for gear that's still tape-based, or the ability to repair equipment built with surface-mount technology.)

 

[dave73]

For market #3 (Chicago), NBC O&O Telemundo has yet to go HD for their news. I don't know what NBC's reason is for not upgrading that station's newsroon equipment for HD. All other programming from the network is HD (just not the news). Univision recently went HD for their news. Even for my local PBS station, WYIN has not fully upgraded to HD. PBS programming from other stations are in HD, but locally produced programming isn't HD.

 

[w9wi]

Small lack stations just don't have the capital of bigger markets, but they also monopolies due to syndex laws. There's no need for them to go HD. Even stations in bigger markets aren't fully HD. Fox 4 in Kansas City can't display weather warnings or snow closings without turning off the Fox network HD and they broadcast only in 2 channel audio during local programming.

Sure, we're seeing multiple incidents of multiple big-4 networks on a single signal. Biloxi, Jackson TN, Evansville IN, etc.. In *every* case I can think of, the duopoly/triopoly has at least one competitor. There aren't any monopolies out there, none of these operations are immune from competition even among OTA viewers. Among the 75%+ of viewers who have some kind of multichannel provider, there is competition galore.

I don't know of *any* station that broadcasts locally-produced programming in 5.1 surround. (we looked into it a few years back but couldn't find any examples anywhere else)

_________________________________________________

What Scott said, about reuse of hand-me-down SD gear... Mostly, it comes down to the actual machine the recordings are played on. If tape is used... older machines suffer mechanical failure galore as moving parts wear out. They require constant attention from skilled techs, techs most smaller stations can't afford to hire. Nobody's training new VTR techs -- would you spend thousands of $$ learning how to repair 1975 Fords?

If we're talking about SD hard-disk systems.. well, again, those are the moving parts that wear out. And in both cases, parts acquisition is a problem. It's probably easier to find tubes for a 1953 analog transmitter than it is to find parts for a circa-1980 U-Matic 3/4" VTR...

_________________________________________________

Dave: it's probably a priorities thing.. As Scott & I have said, upgrading production control to do HD news, and upgrading playout gear to do HD syndicated programming, are both expensive endeavors. Many stations can't afford to do both simultaneously. (even in Market #3, you have to have a decent return on investment) So I wouldn't be surprised to see someone with HD local production & no HD syndicated material or vice-versa.

 

[fybush]

Sure, we're seeing multiple incidents of multiple big-4 networks on a single signal. Biloxi, Jackson TN, Evansville IN, etc.. In *every* case I can think of, the duopoly/triopoly has at least one competitor. There aren't any monopolies out there, none of these operations are immune from competition even among OTA viewers.

*cough*Lima, Ohio*cough*

;D ;D ;D

 

[w9wi]

OK, so you found one

Any others?

(of course, even in Lima, Fred's station faces competition among the 75%+ of the population that has cable/satellite)

 

[anotherguyTN]

I guess this is a related question. I've been told that WBBJ in Jackson, TN is unable to add ME-TV as a full subchannel because of limited bandwidth and that they would have to make technical changes (Possibly new equipment?) before they can add it on another subchannel permanently. As it stands now they have:

7.1, which is ABC at 720P
7.2, which is the same programming as 7.1 except with SAP audio when its's available at 720P. I was told that this is actually the audio only, and the video is actually 7.1.
7.3, which is CBS and ME TV for filler at 480I

It seems to me that 7.2 is being wasted since it's the same programming as 7.1 only with SAP when it's available, but they're saying it's audio only. Is this true or are they making excuses? In any case it doesn't look like they're in any hurry to add ME TV as a full subchannel.

 

[fybush]

OK, so you found one

Any others?

(of course, even in Lima, Fred's station faces competition among the 75%+ of the population that has cable/satellite)

For viewers, yes. For local ad dollars, not so much - unless the local cable company sells ads against WLIO/WOHL, which they may well do.

I believe Saga's combo in Victoria, Texas also has all of the Big Four.

I don't know of any others. Presumably WAGM could do it in Presque Isle if they wanted to, or KXGN in Glendive.