Quote:
Originally Posted by justalurker 
One has a choice. Pay for an antenna or pay to have someone deliver that content via cable/satellite. Even though I live about 15 miles from the antenna farm I get more reliable reception via satellite than OTA. (LOS is better to satellite than the farm.) And since I'm buying satellite for content that my local stations don't carry getting locals that way is a bonus.
BTW: DISH spends a lot of money to carry local channels ... receive sites, backhauls, uplink centers, more complex satellites ... all stuff that would not be needed if locals were not part of the picture. And then some stations add on their pound of flesh ... "pennies a day" that add up to a lot when every channel makes a demand.
And since the regulations do not require the same deal for all providers the pony can be a different size. Some systems may be getting a channel for free or "pennies per month" while others get held up for higher rates.
There needs to be better regulation ... personally I'd prefer a statutory license fee if anything is paid to the station. No negotiating between station and providers ... just a federally set price. That would best serve the consumer. I'd prefer that price to be "free" ... but as long as it is consistent across cable and satellite and across stations a statutory price would be better than "lets see how much we can milk the viewers via their providers".
Dear station: Before my locals were on satellite I found it more convenient to watch other content. If you're not carried I'll learn to live without you.
One has a choice. Pay for an antenna or pay to have someone deliver that content via cable/satellite. Even though I live about 15 miles from the antenna farm I get more reliable reception via satellite than OTA. (LOS is better to satellite than the farm.) And since I'm buying satellite for content that my local stations don't carry getting locals that way is a bonus.
BTW: DISH spends a lot of money to carry local channels ... receive sites, backhauls, uplink centers, more complex satellites ... all stuff that would not be needed if locals were not part of the picture. And then some stations add on their pound of flesh ... "pennies a day" that add up to a lot when every channel makes a demand.
And since the regulations do not require the same deal for all providers the pony can be a different size. Some systems may be getting a channel for free or "pennies per month" while others get held up for higher rates.
There needs to be better regulation ... personally I'd prefer a statutory license fee if anything is paid to the station. No negotiating between station and providers ... just a federally set price. That would best serve the consumer. I'd prefer that price to be "free" ... but as long as it is consistent across cable and satellite and across stations a statutory price would be better than "lets see how much we can milk the viewers via their providers".
Dear station: Before my locals were on satellite I found it more convenient to watch other content. If you're not carried I'll learn to live without you.
That, however, destroys free enterprise. You are doing this out of convenience. Now, if they started charging OTA viewers, that is an entirely different story. Quite frankly, I say they should charge at least a buck a month to DirecTV and Dish. Then, being how lazy people are, some would go back to an antenna, but most would stay put and just grumble. And putting up an attic antenna in a home isn't terribly hard for most. And it provides a nicer picture than the pay services (unless they buypass the muxer). What would best serve the consumer is for them to get off their backsides, quit grumbling about something slightly inconvenient, and get a source of TV in so that in an emergency, they aren't greeted by "no signal from satellite". And, as you said above, if you don't like it, then you are certainly free to live without them.
