I have some questions...
Quote:
The spectrum is a scarce and valuable resource that these companies have been given for free. In effect, the government has given those companies a huge subsidy, and now they have to deliver the goods... |
What new spectrum was created for broadcasters? Back in the "old" days, when UHF channels were all but ignored, broadcasters had 470 MHz to 920 MHz (remember those old "click" style tuners that went to channel 88). Of course now everything above 806 MHz (channel 69) is used for cellular and SMR communications. The FCC has definite but delayed plans to take the spectrum allocated from channels 60 through 69 this decade. Channels 50 through 59 are also scheduled to go after NTSC signals are abandoned. That is to say, broadcasters are using less spectrum today - for NTSC and DTV - than they were originally allocated 50 years ago. None of the current UHF spectrum that has been allocated for the DTV transition can be used for other purposes because it would interfere with existing NTSC operations.
Quote:
The problem is those businesses are sitting on the valuable spectrum our government handed out to them. By further delaying the DTV transition, valuable public spectrum will not be returned sooner, and not auctioned out for their rightful use, and not provide revenue in the hundreds of billions that the government badly needs in the years to come. |
Please define"rightful use."
If you take a look at those spectrum auctions, you will find that many of the companies that won a bid either defaulted on the auction fees or went bankrupt because their business plan for that spectrum was faulted or market conditions had changed. The spectrum argument can be traced back to the Communications Act of 1934. The precedent is that the limited amount of spectrum is the resource of all of the country's citizens. How does auctioning spectrum off to private companies - who turn around and charge the citizens of the country for the use thereof - benefit the general citizenry? Broadcast television - whether it is analog or digital - makes news and information programming FREE to everyone. All that is required is the appropriate receiver.
Who did the American public turn to for coverage of the September 11th terrorist attacks? The answer is they overwhelmingly turned to broadcast stations. The networks and broadcasters suspended regular programming and commercials for the better part of a week to cover that situation. They fulfilled their public obligation in doing so even though it meant the loss of sorely needed revenues in what was already a tough year. The difference is that the OTA broadcast system was able to deliver to all those people who can't afford cable/DBS or live on mobile platforms (boats and trailers/RV's). That is the value the American public derives from broadcaster's use of the spectrum.
Quote:
You don't upgrade by such and such date, then you lose what is allocated to you, so that it can be used by someone else, that way nothing is actually required, and the choice is left to the stations. Or even better, give out frequencies on a first-come-first-serve basis. When they run out, they run out...slow to upgrade broadcasters will simply be out of luck. I guarantee you that everyone will be upgraded in that case. |
The television broadcast business is not a good place to be right now. It is a mature business (read: hard to grow profits), with competitors (cable and DBS) who benefit from subscriber and advertiser revenues. At the same time, broadcasters are expected to turn high profit margins by the Wall Street investors.
I've asked this before: If the broadcasters don't upgrade, who do you think is going to put up millions of dollar$ to build out a DTV plant (without any revenue from an existing NTSC operation) so that they can broadcast to a population where less than 1% of the total population can receive the signal? Then - given the huge DTV viewing public in Anymarket, USA - who is going to buy advertising on that station so that you can relax in the comfort of your living room and watch high quality H/DTV programming for free?
The timetable for the DTV rollout was a political decision made in 1996 (when the economy was flying high) by bureaucrats in government agency. It was a political plan, not a business plan. It made certain assumptions about revenue from spectrum auctions and the health and welfare of the broadcasting industry in the (then) future. The assumptions were wrong and the plan has to be modified if the basic tenants of it - free, OTA DTV (not necessarily HDTV) for the public - are to succeed. These delays are part of reforecasting an old plan to the reality of the day.
- Peter Dennant