O-O

bicker

I think an argument can be made that broadcasters would benefit from being able to present a more appealing product to viewers, which will actually end up helping them compete against Blu-ray, Wii/Xbox/PS, and other new diversions.

O-O

I can agree with that, but broadcasters are also having to invest and spend the most money comparatively to anyone else. All I see is costs to broadcasters with little benefit.

1inxs

I don't think the OTA DTV technology has evolved to its full potential. In time the DTV transition will settle into its niche. With the addition of sub channels for OTA DTV transition, it wouldn't be difficult for a broadcast station to add VOD or PPV to their lineup. All that would be needed is a small decoder set top box. I'd be pleased if they were to add a commercial free PPV Movie channel along with my current 33 channel/sub channel variety. All it would take is a merger or license agreement with a current VOD or PPV company to set us up for OTA DTV movies on demand. I'd bet this is the direction broadcasters are going. If they don't do it someone else will find a way to contract through their hardware and broadcast towers to deliver programming for pay.

Piggie

PPV could be done streaming in none real time. Choose it in the morning and watch it when you get home. And even then there would not be the bandwidth but for a couple of choices. The channels just aren't wide enough for all this expansion. Crammed into 6MHz and using ATSC, most broadcasters are already past their maximum load. One of the big unused chunks of bandwidth are the FOX stations using the splicer and not running anything in the remaining area. FOX may have plans though that no one knows, but I don't think they do.

__________________
The more I understand, the less I know.

Don_M

You're completely correct in regards to the commercial stations. PBS affiliates, OTOH, were allegedly reimbursed for the marginal cost of having to run two transmitters for an additional four months in the federal stimulus bill, passed in February.

There's something to this argument. RTV, America One and ThisTV are just a few of the networks with business plans revolving around snagging the subchannels of full-power and LP digital stations throughout the country. We'd be seeing a lot more affiliates signing up with these networks -- and a lot more such networks out there -- if we were still in boom times. Alas, the transition took place during what's perhaps the worst recession we've had in 70 years. When credit starts flowing toward startups again, we'll see this particular rose bloom.

In the meantime, DTV has already gone a long way toward fulfilling its promise. Several years ago -- back when HDTVs and DTV tuners cost thousands, and we were getting a maximum of 18 analog channels OTA, not a few of them snowy -- I told my wife that the Denver market could easily support 40 or more main and sub-channels from the local broadcast outlets once the digital transition took place. At less than two months past the final transition, we're already up to 37 snow-free, non-duplicating channels, despite the recession. Denver is a big market at No. 19 in total TV households per Nielsen, but it's by no means huge.

Sure, there's much that isn't worth watching on many of those 37 channels, but that's also true of pay TV. Regardless, there's more than one entity out there that thinks OTA has a bright future from which they can profit. These guys aren't aiming at must carry, because subchannels are exempt from that requirement. OTA is far from being dead and buried.