HDTV penetration reaches 65% - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 56 Old 05-07-2010, 06:45 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Marcus Carr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Baltimore City
Posts: 8,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Thursday, May 6, 2010, 11:32am EDT

HDTV penetration reaches 65%


Washington Business Journal - by Jeff Clabaugh

Two-thirds of U.S. households now own a high-definition television, and more Americans plan to buy one in the coming months, according to a report from the Consumer Electronics Association.

The Arlington-based group says video products continue to be the top consumer electronics device U.S. consumers own, with 65 percent of U.S. homes now owning at least one HDTV set, up 13 percent from a year ago. Consumers are also buying HDTVs as secondary sets. The average household now has 1.8 high-definition televisions, up from 1.5 percent a year ago.

The study also says 23 percent of Americans plan to buy an HDTV in the next 12 months.

A drop in price, widespread availability of HD content and successful completion of the digital television transition last year have all led to an increased ownership rate for HDTV's, said Brian Markwalter, vice president of research and standards.

The CEA also says 86 percent of U.S. households now own at least one computer, making computers the third-most owned consumer electronics product behind televisions and DVD players

http://washington.bizjournals.com/wa...3/daily61.html

YOU ARE READING AVS FORUM

Marcus Carr is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 56 Old 05-07-2010, 06:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
dm145's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Clifton, NJ
Posts: 4,816
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Carr View Post

Thursday, May 6, 2010, 11:32am EDT

HDTV penetration reaches 65%


Washington Business Journal - by Jeff Clabaugh

Two-thirds of U.S. households now own a high-definition television, and more Americans plan to buy one in the coming months, according to a report from the Consumer Electronics Association.

The Arlington-based group says video products continue to be the top consumer electronics device U.S. consumers own, with 65 percent of U.S. homes now owning at least one HDTV set, up 13 percent from a year ago. Consumers are also buying HDTVs as secondary sets. The average household now has 1.8 high-definition televisions, up from 1.5 percent a year ago.

The study also says 23 percent of Americans plan to buy an HDTV in the next 12 months.

A drop in price, widespread availability of HD content and successful completion of the digital television transition last year have all led to an increased ownership rate for HDTV's, said Brian Markwalter, vice president of research and standards.

The CEA also says 86 percent of U.S. households now own at least one computer, making computers the third-most owned consumer electronics product behind televisions and DVD players

http://washington.bizjournals.com/wa...3/daily61.html

now a study needs to be done to see how many Americans actually have their HDTVs hooked up correctly
dm145 is offline  
post #3 of 56 Old 05-07-2010, 07:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
steverobertson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: E. Walpole, MA USA
Posts: 5,454
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by dm145 View Post

now a study needs to be done to see how many Americans actually have their HDTVs hooked up correctly

I will guess about 10%

It is amazing what I see people watching on their HD sets and then have to show them how wrong they are but I am at the point now of if your happy looking at crappy tv go for it
steverobertson is offline  
post #4 of 56 Old 05-07-2010, 07:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
McDonoughDawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 19
There's a joke in that headline somewhere....

Peachtree City Golf Cart Rider
McDonoughDawg is offline  
post #5 of 56 Old 05-07-2010, 03:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Rick_R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Simi Valley, CA USA
Posts: 3,213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
When I bought my HDTV 10 years ago this summer I remember being in an argument as to whether HD capability had reached 1/10 of 1 %. That 1/10 of 1 % would have been 100,000 households and the consensus was that it was no where near that.

Rick R
Rick_R is offline  
post #6 of 56 Old 05-07-2010, 04:22 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
scowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 10,438
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by dm145 View Post

now a study needs to be done to see how many Americans actually have their HDTVs hooked up correctly

And how many are still watching the SD channels on cable because it's easier to punch in "8" instead of "708".

NOW: my post on AVS Forum.
NEXT: someone else's post on AVS Forum.
scowl is offline  
post #7 of 56 Old 05-07-2010, 04:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
nickdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,488
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by scowl View Post

And how many are still watching the SD channels on cable because it's easier to punch in "8" instead of "708".

*raises hand and waves*

Before I canceled my cable I was watching channel 8. But that was only because it was easier than punching in "1408" into TWC's crappy, slow laggy Navigator box with their crummy remote. Never had a problem when the HD channels were three digit numbers though.

That's why I really think TWC's "TV Made Easy" thing will only further hurt HD adaptation. People were upset enough about going from 1 or 2 to 3 digit numbers. Now they expect us to know 4 digit numbers.

If HDTV penetration is truely at 65%, then I think now is the time to make channel 4 be CBS HD and make make CBS analog be channel 1004, instead of the other way around.
nickdawg is offline  
post #8 of 56 Old 05-07-2010, 04:42 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 45,876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by scowl View Post

And how many are still watching the SD channels on cable because it's easier to punch in "8" instead of "708".

Comcast's new iGuide has a cool feature to deal with that. When you tune to any channel that has an HD counterpart, there is a 'Watch HD Now' button on the Info bar. All you have to do is hit 'OK', and presto-chango, you're watching HD.

'Better Living Through Modern, Expensive, Electronic Devices'

Ken H is offline  
post #9 of 56 Old 05-07-2010, 06:40 PM
 
BCF68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,463
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by steverobertson View Post

I will guess about 10%

It is amazing what I see people watching on their HD sets and then have to show them how wrong they are but I am at the point now of if your happy looking at crappy tv go for it

I have a friend that bought a 65 in projection HDTV about 3-4 years ago had DirectTv but no HD. Even connected the STB it to the TV via coax. He got a PS3 connected the same way via RF switch. All his SD content was in stretch-o-vision. He though his picture was great. I told him once my 27 inch tube TV had a better picture and his response was "No it doesn't, this is a HDTV". I asked him when he was going to upgrade to the HD package for DirecTv. He said it was to much money. Somehow $10 was too much. $26 for HBO and Showtime ( in SD only by the way ) and $18 for the Payboy Channel wasn't too expensive. Ok whatever.

Finally I gave him a component cable I had for a PS2 to use on his PS3 since my son got a XBOX 360 and didn't play his PS2 anymore. Needless to say he was surprised how much better his PS3 games looked. Still watched DVDs though. One time at the video store I told him the movie he was going to rent was available on blu-ray for rent he asked me if it was the same price. I said it was $1 more. His response "F--k that I'll rent the DVD"

I never understood why he paid $1600 for that Tv just to watch SD content.
BCF68 is offline  
post #10 of 56 Old 05-07-2010, 09:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Westly-C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Techno World
Posts: 2,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by scowl View Post

And how many are still watching the SD channels on cable because it's easier to punch in "8" instead of "708".

Dialing a 5 digit channels-105-1, 114-11, etc, in a darkened living room at night can be a pain. Especially when you dial wrong, and get a black screen, leaving you in even more dark.

Dazed and confused over high tech.

Sigh...Concrap. The Internet Overlord Cometh
They're not com-tastic!
Westly-C is offline  
post #11 of 56 Old 05-07-2010, 09:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Hughmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,556
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by dm145 View Post

now a study needs to be done to see how many Americans actually have their HDTVs hooked up correctly


When HDTV owners say the PQ isn't as good as their old set, and they don't mean SD channels, well, most likely they aren't set up right, the 32 inch crt was bigger than the 32 in lcd, but they sit the same or farther and think wider is bigger, wrong cables, wrong channels, and some are simply not getting how it should look.
Hughmc is online now  
post #12 of 56 Old 05-07-2010, 10:26 PM
 
BCF68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,463
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hughmc View Post

When HDTV owners say the PQ isn't as good as their old set, and they don't mean SD channels, well, most likely they aren't set up right, the 32 inch crt was bigger than the 32 in lcd, but they sit the same or farther and think wider is bigger, wrong cables, wrong channels, and some are simply not getting how it should look.

You'd think that be common sense since the dimensons are different. A 27 inch CRT needs a 32 inch HDTV to have the same height. A 32 inch CRT nees 37 inch to be about the same height. You'd think stores would help out and inform potential customers of this fact. Someone that had a 19 inch CRT and gets a 19 inch HDTV is going to be very disappointed.

As far as wiring. Most people are used to just hooking the coax into the TV or using composite cables. Doesn't help that stores try to sell HDMI cables for $30 or more. Someone that doesn't realize composite cable can't pass along a HD signal is going to choose a $5 composite cable over a $30 HDMI cable.
BCF68 is offline  
post #13 of 56 Old 05-07-2010, 10:41 PM
 
BCF68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,463
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
3 years ago the CEA said 30% had HDTV. So basically one can predict close to 100% in 2013. Hopefully by 2018 cable/sat will just be all HD. Cable with it's analog/ digital SD/ HD is really holding it back trying to cater to 3 different kinds of customers.
BCF68 is offline  
post #14 of 56 Old 05-07-2010, 10:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Hughmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,556
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCF68 View Post

You'd think that be common sense since the dimensons are different. A 27 inch CRT needs a 32 inch HDTV to have the same height. A 32 inch CRT nees 37 inch to be about the same height. You'd think stores would help out and inform potential customers of this fact. Someone that had a 19 inch CRT and gets a 19 inch HDTV is going to be very disappointed.

As far as wiring. Most people are used to just hooking the coax into the TV or using composite cables. Doesn't help that stores try to sell HDMI cables for $30 or more. Someone that doesn't realize composite cable can't pass along a HD signal is going to choose a $5 composite cable over a $30 HDMI cable.

Which sounds bigger, 4x3 or 16x9? , Full Screen HD, haha. This is the gullible American public we are talking about, you know, super size it.

Your right, the salesmen should give more info as to what people are buying. And I had to tell my sister to bring back those 40.00 cables, to Best Buy.
Hughmc is online now  
post #15 of 56 Old 05-07-2010, 10:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
nickdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,488
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
$40? That's it? When I bought my TV a few years ago, they tried to sell me a HDMI cable that cost much more than $40. I swear it was over $100. It's almost as if Best Buy and Monster have a deal or something, to sell more product. And it's completely unnecessary since every HD cable box comes with component cables packed in the carton, for free!!
nickdawg is offline  
post #16 of 56 Old 05-08-2010, 02:02 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Hughmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,556
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickdawg View Post

$40? That's it? When I bought my TV a few years ago, they tried to sell me a HDMI cable that cost much more than $40. I swear it was over $100. It's almost as if Best Buy and Monster have a deal or something, to sell more product. And it's completely unnecessary since every HD cable box comes with component cables packed in the carton, for free!!


40.00 for 3 ft. HAHA. I know, dumb as me when I first got into this back in 2003, I bought the 6 ft Monster 100.00 DVI cable. Well it really is a heavy duty cable, but well you know. It looks pretty with the "gold".
Hughmc is online now  
post #17 of 56 Old 05-08-2010, 06:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ncxcstud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Mason, MI
Posts: 1,110
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by scowl View Post

And how many are still watching the SD channels on cable because it's easier to punch in "8" instead of "708".

I still think that DirecTV's solution to this is the best. An SD and HD feed per channel number, and it defaults to the HD when you have a HD box . Then you can 'hide' the SD channels and never have to worry about that again

Go Texas Rangers!
Go Dallas Cowboys!
Go Newberry College!

Pastor of All Saints Lutheran Church in Mason, MI

XBOX360 and PSN gamertags - ncxcstud
ncxcstud is offline  
post #18 of 56 Old 05-08-2010, 06:30 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,484
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 96 Post(s)
Liked: 389
Quote:
Originally Posted by McDonoughDawg View Post

There's a joke in that headline somewhere....

Something to do with HDTV virgins, perhaps?

At any rate, I've actually talked my parents out of getting an HD set because they have no intention of upgrading their cable to HD service (which would mean replacing their standalone SD TiVo if they wanted to record anything in HD). Since they have poor line of sight for OTA, that's not an option for them.
NetworkTV is offline  
post #19 of 56 Old 05-08-2010, 10:10 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
foxeng's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Where ever I am is where I am.
Posts: 13,973
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick_R View Post

When I bought my HDTV 10 years ago this summer I remember being in an argument as to whether HD capability had reached 1/10 of 1 %. That 1/10 of 1 % would have been 100,000 households and the consensus was that it was no where near that.

Rick R

In 2000 there were less than 100,000 HD displays of any kind in the US, professional or commercial so no, there were not 100,000 households with HD displays.

All opinions expressed (unless otherwise noted) are the posters and NOT the posters employers. The poster in NO WAY is/will speak for his employers.
foxeng is online now  
post #20 of 56 Old 05-08-2010, 11:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
David James's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Longmont, CO
Posts: 1,919
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 58
The number shouldn't be surprising, try and buy a SD TV, it's not easy. Despite not being in the market for a new TV, I'll often look at them. Today I was at Super Target and there were no SD TV's. I'm not saying you can't find them, but anyone looking for something of any size is buying an HD set whether they plan on watching HD or not.
David James is offline  
post #21 of 56 Old 05-08-2010, 11:25 AM
 
BCF68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,463
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by David James View Post

The number shouldn't be surprising, try and buy a SD TV, it's not easy. Despite not being in the market for a new TV, I'll often look at them. Today I was at Super Target and there were no SD TV's. I'm not saying you can't find them, but anyone looking for something of any size is buying an HD set whether they plan on watching HD or not.

The only place you can find SDTVs in my area is at Fred's and those TVs are those off-brands. I'm not sure you can find a SDTV made by a well known manufacturer. Honestly I wouldn't by any electronics from Fred's
BCF68 is offline  
post #22 of 56 Old 05-08-2010, 09:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TVOD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,881
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by McDonoughDawg View Post

There's a joke in that headline somewhere....

I don't see where, but I'm looking forward to full penetration. At that point the providers can pull out of the SD business. It seems that 46" is the average I'm seeing people go for, but with each year they want bigger. Some maintain that size doesn't really matter, but rather it's the quality of the motion and the colors they experience. Prices keep going down. Now with 3D consumers can enjoy the extra depth. New technology just keeps thrusting its way into our lives, and there are always those who are ready to swallow it as it comes. What a hobby.
TVOD is offline  
post #23 of 56 Old 05-08-2010, 09:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rezzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Matrix
Posts: 7,650
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by steverobertson View Post

It is amazing what I see people watching on their HD sets and then have to show them how wrong they are but I am at the point now of if your happy looking at crappy tv go for it

I stopped trying to show people..

"But I didn't do it...!"
"I knew you'd say that"...*BLAM!*
rezzy is offline  
post #24 of 56 Old 05-08-2010, 10:48 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCF68 View Post

The only place you can find SDTVs in my area is at Fred's...

Larger than 20 inches? That's as large as I've seen.
Rammitinski is offline  
post #25 of 56 Old 05-09-2010, 12:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
URFloorMatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Washington, D.C.
Posts: 3,608
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by David James View Post

The number shouldn't be surprising, try and buy a SD TV, it's not easy. Despite not being in the market for a new TV, I'll often look at them. Today I was at Super Target and there were no SD TV's. I'm not saying you can't find them, but anyone looking for something of any size is buying an HD set whether they plan on watching HD or not.

Makes you wonder if the number of houses actually viewing HD programming is going to hit a brick wall pretty soon. Most of the analysts have HDTV set penetration well over 90% between 2012-2014. It seems highly unlikely that the number of people viewing HD content will continue to rise at that kind of blistering pace, despite significant efforts at educating owners.
URFloorMatt is offline  
post #26 of 56 Old 05-09-2010, 12:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tall1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Twin Cities
Posts: 1,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TVOD View Post

I don't see where, but I'm looking forward to full penetration. At that point the providers can pull out of the SD business. It seems that 46" is the average I'm seeing people go for, but with each year they want bigger. Some maintain that size doesn't really matter, but rather it's the quality of the motion and the colors they experience. Prices keep going down. Now with 3D consumers can enjoy the extra depth. New technology just keeps thrusting its way into our lives, and there are always those who are ready to swallow it as it comes. What a hobby.

I need a cigarette...
tall1 is offline  
post #27 of 56 Old 05-09-2010, 12:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
pappy97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by URFloorMatt View Post

Makes you wonder if the number of houses actually viewing HD programming is going to hit a brick wall pretty soon. Most of the analysts have HDTV set penetration well over 90% between 2012-2014. It seems highly unlikely that the number of people viewing HD content will continue to rise at that kind of blistering pace, despite significant efforts at educating owners.

I'd like to see studies on what percentage of the population is actually watching HD programming (in HD) and how that has changed over the years and expected trends. I think that is more telling than HDTV penetration, as you said, will hit 90% soon.
pappy97 is offline  
post #28 of 56 Old 05-09-2010, 03:14 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
foxeng's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Where ever I am is where I am.
Posts: 13,973
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by pappy97 View Post

I'd like to see studies on what percentage of the population is actually watching HD programming (in HD) and how that has changed over the years and expected trends. I think that is more telling than HDTV penetration, as you said, will hit 90% soon.

I saw some numbers about 6 months ago and the number of households watching HD on HD displays is nowhere near the number of households with HD displays. The numbers are quite depressing. That is why you see all the providers pushing HD services so hard.

All opinions expressed (unless otherwise noted) are the posters and NOT the posters employers. The poster in NO WAY is/will speak for his employers.
foxeng is online now  
post #29 of 56 Old 05-09-2010, 04:37 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,484
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 96 Post(s)
Liked: 389
Quote:
Originally Posted by foxeng View Post

I saw some numbers about 6 months ago and the number of households watching HD on HD displays is nowhere near the number of households with HD displays. The numbers are quite depressing. That is why you see all the providers pushing HD services so hard.

If they really wanted to make a push, they wouldn't charge extra for the privilege.

I know it sounds silly for someone to buy the TV, then not be willing to pay the $10 a month for access, but this isn't 2001 anymore, when a 42" TV cost $1200-$1800 (and that was seldom for a sexy flat panel). You can get the same thing now for around $600-$800, depending on brand, which almost doesn't matter anymore with how good many of the budget brands have become. A 27" SD tube TV would run you a good $400-$500 back then, so around $600 for a bit more real estate isn't going to break the bank.

However, $10 a month is $120 a year - probably forever, since that charge likely won't go away so much as be absorbed into the basic price. Now, I realize some providers don't have that extra charge for HD, but it's often there in some form, either through needed to order a larger minimum package or more advance (read: more expensive) equipment.

Not only that, with cable and satellite, now you're talking about a box verses just plugging into the wall jack with analog cable. Now, once more providers start going all digital, you might see more people stepping up since they need the box anyway, but for now, the system is simple. It just works.

In a time when many are considering cutting back on services, adding more is not likely an option.
NetworkTV is offline  
post #30 of 56 Old 05-09-2010, 04:46 AM
 
bicker1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Burlington, MA
Posts: 8,289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
The providers derive very little benefit, except for the revenue associated with related charges, from pushing more of their customers to make use of HD sources. The providers' push for HD is all a matter of marketing, being able to say that they have # HD channels, that they do have XXX channel in HD, etc.
bicker1 is offline  
Reply HDTV Programming

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off