AVS Official Topic - The FCC & Broadcast Spectrum - Page 89

Americans like you depend on their local TV stations. That's why last year you took swift action to tell Congress to protect free, local broadcast TV as the government considered ways to reclaim broadcast spectrum and auction it off for other services.

Due in large part to your advocacy, Congress heard the voices of TV viewers across America and just last week passed spectrum auction legislation that contains viewer protections, ensuring local over-the-air TV stations have the ability to innovate and provide viewers like you with the news, emergency information, sports and entertainment you expect and deserve.

Viewers and broadcasters alike should be pleased with the outcome of this legislation. It would not have been possible without your help and engagement. But our work is not finished. We must continue working to ensure that free and local TV is able to operate and innovate in a marketplace free of unnecessary regulation, preserving local television's ability to provide viewers with the great services you currently receive and those on the horizon.

Continue visiting www.TheFutureofTV.org for more information on how you can help to ensure an even brighter future for free, local television. And don't forget to read our blog, connect with us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter to stay updated on the future of TV.

We thank you for taking action! Together, we are securing a vibrant and robust future for free, local over-the-air TV.

Originally Posted by BCF68

Relinquishment in this case has three potential meanings--giving up broadcasting; giving up a UHF channel in return for a VHF reassignment; or vacating a UHF channel to share a 6 MHz assignment with another station

I can just imagine the PQ of 2 stations broadcasting HD with several SD subchannels trying to share 6 MHz of spectrum.

Originally Posted by Calaveras

I'm sure that situation would be awful but KSBW is running NBC in 1080i on 8.1 and ABC in 720p on 8.2 and I can't honestly say that I can see any problem. The only thing I have not been able to compare is live sports on both networks on KSBW to my separate NBC and ABC affiliates.

Chuck

Originally Posted by OTAhead

I really don't look for a lot of full powers to put their spectrum up for auction. What I do expect is for a lot of zombie/phantom low powers (who aren't on the air anyway despite declaring they are) to jump at the chance to sell their spectrum and then use the proceeds to build out on another channel if they can find one, or team up with other LPs and share spectrum.

What happens if the total from the forward auction is less than that from the reverse auction?

The law requires the auction to at least break even. So if the forward auction doesn't yield enough money, then no TV licenses are reclaimed and no new wireless licenses are issued.

Once the FCC has conducted the reverse auction, it will have enough information to repack the TV band to consolidate and maximize the spectrum available for the forward auction. Is that correct?

Yes. The FCC can't design the licenses it wants to sell until it knows how much spectrum it can clear. And to figure that out, it has to have a good idea of how many stations are willing to tender; how efficiently it can re-pack remaining stations; and what constraints it will face along the Canadian and Mexican borders.

There's probably a huge, huge difference in the whole auction depending on whether a half-dozen stations in a few key markets are in or out. The amount of spectrum cleared nationwide would be much greater if 18 stations in New York, Baltimore-Washington and Los Angeles bid versus 12. Those aren't the only critical markets, but you get the idea. The FCC really needs volunteers in areas of high population density.

The law includes repacking safeguards for broadcasters who choose not to participate in the auction. It requires the FCC to "make all reasonable efforts" not to diminish the coverage areas of non-participating stations and it prohibits the FCC from moving stations from U to V or from high V to low V. Do you think the safeguards are adequate?

I think the NAB did a good job with the safeguards. The auction proponents wanted provisions that would have been disastrous, and that's not an exaggeration. Would I like to have seen more safeguards? Of course. The right of stations to protest license modifications something stations have always had has been stripped for the repacking. That means you're going to need some particularly good lawyering and engineering if you think your station was shortchanged. I think we could blow through the $1.75 billion repacking fund long before all claims are satisfied.

Why does the law stipulate that there can be only one auction?

That's one of the protections. We don't want to have to go through this over and over. And we want the FCC to design an honest and fair process. If they could do multiple auctions it could be death by a thousand cuts. They could design rules to get channels from truly desperate stations for a pittance, knowing they could come back later. Or they could try some really aggressive approaches. If they got reversed by the court of appeals they could go back and try something else. One auction forces the FCC to really work hard to get it done all at once and means broadcasters don't have to live under the sword of Damocles, always worried about the next repacking.

You suggested that the $1.75 billion that the law sets aside from auction proceeds to reimburse broadcasters for their repacking costs may be inadequate. Why?

I'm pretty sure a lot of soft costs will go unreimbursed. And I don't know how the FCC will dole out funds. Do they have to wait until all claims are in? Do they pay costs as incurred? Do broadcasters have to finance the repacking with their own capital? Will cost of capital be reimbursed? New equipment isn't free, but neither is the cost of money, and real money will have to be spent. What happens if they run out of money? I understand the need for a cap. The experience of other rebanding processes shows that open-ended cost reimbursement programs don't work. But I have reservations.

I understand the incentive auction is only available to full-power and class A station. What happens to the other LPTVs.

In legal terms, we call it SOL statutorily out of luck. LPTVs and translators aren't eligible to bid in spectrum and they have no protection in repacking. In many cases, there may be plenty of spectrum for translators and LPTVs to relocate, but their relocation costs aren't likely to be compensated. It's grim. Congress threw them under the bus.

Can't the FCC just go ahead and repack the TV band to squeeze out more spectrum on its own authority without conducting an auction? Would such a non-auction repack be subject to the safeguards in the new law?

You mean without conducting incentive auctions? Before the new law passed, the FCC probably could have repacked the broadcast band in theory anyway. But that has changed. The law gives the FCC one, and only one, shot at repacking, and the repacking safeguards apply to that repacking.

Originally Posted by Calaveras

Repacking all those would be the death of OTA HD. Then I suppose you'd have to have cable or satellite to get HD. Wouldn't they love that!

Originally Posted by L David Matheny

If OTA goes away, I'll have to stream, buy DVD and Blu-ray sets, and read more. Certainly I won't be watching commercials.

Originally Posted by Rammitinski

Are you not already familiar with real-time streaming?

Originally Posted by L David Matheny

I sometimes see HD Netflix movies at a friend's house, so I'm familiar with it. But right now I have only 768/384 DSL (due to distance), so I can't stream anything much but SD YouTube. I hope something faster (other than cable) will be available by the time I need it.

Originally Posted by L David Matheny

But would cable and satellite survive longterm if broadcast disappeared as a source of programming? Maybe PBS could still import good material. I'm surely not the only person out here who will never subscribe to cable unless I can get cheap a la carte pricing on a few channels of my choosing, which is unlikely. If OTA goes away, I'll have to stream, buy DVD and Blu-ray sets, and read more. Certainly I won't be watching commercials.

Originally Posted by Rammitinski

I was referring mainly to the "no commercials" part of what you said. There are definitely commercials, especially with many of the provider's television programming.

And without a DVR, you can't skip them, either.

Originally Posted by nathill

WREP-LD 15 LD LIC MARTINSVILLE IN US BLDTL-20090710AEP - 55759 0.2 kW 0. m METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF MARTINSVILLE

Will it be gone, or is it safe?

Originally Posted by Dave Loudin

All LPTVs and translators are secondary users of the TV spectrum, so allocation changes, either due to this possible re-pack of all channels or the licensing of one full-power station, can knock any of them off the air. Of course, the affected LPTV could ask for a different channel (under normal circumstances, not the re-pack) in order to stay on the air.

Originally Posted by BCF68

Not after the FCC takes away 31-51.

Originally Posted by dkreichen1968

There is a very good chance that even a "very motivated" FCC may fail to have a "successful" auction.

Originally Posted by BCF68

You're right the FCC is only going to take away 45-51 because after all 42 MHz is going to solve this spectrum issue they are talking about. The FCC gets ONE just ONE shot at this so they are going to get as much as they can.

Originally Posted by BCF68

The FCC gets ONE just ONE shot at this so they are going to get as much as they can.

Originally Posted by dkreichen1968

All the legal analysis I've seen shows that the FCC actually lost power with the new law. They are limited to one voluntary auction and involuntary repack within the next 10 years, after which the TV band will be effectively statutorily fixed. (Before the law passed they could have in theory repacked the band however and whenever they wanted to.)

Originally Posted by joblo

That's not how I read it.

First, the law both authorizes and requires one and only one reverse and forward auction of TV spectrum by the end of fiscal 2022. Second, the law specifically provides for repacking as necessary to complete the forward auction, subject to certain restrictions, e.g. no U-to-V, Hi-to-Lo, etc. Finally, the law prohibits any other repacking from the time of enactment until either the auction authority expires or the auctions are completed, whichever comes first.

This is the relevant text from the bill:
The highlighted proviso indicates a failed auction in which no reallocation takes place.

In other words, once the required auction process is completed, and whether that process succeeds or fails to reallocate spectrum, FCC authority to repack reverts to whatever it was prior to the passage of the law.

If you know of some other provision which "effectively statutorily fixes" the TV band, please cite.