3.5 Million People Expected to Cut Cord by Year's End (2012)

dkreichen1968

Moderator
Staff member
#1
It's becoming a growing trend, by the end of the year three and a half million people will do it.

Kevin Stalions and his wife cut the cord on their satellite service three months ago. Stalions paid $120 a month for about 15 regularly watched channels.

When he crunched the numbers, he says it wasn't worth it. Stalions now pays a little more than $60 a month for his internet, Netflix, and Hulu Plus. Netflix provides a full data base of movies for eight bucks a month. Hulu Plus costs the same and streams much of the family's favorite television shows online.

How did he do it?

He bought a high definition multimedia interface or HDMI connector, which runs from his PC to his TV. A Roku box or Apple TV-streaming player does the trick too. It allows people like Stalion to stream internet programming straight to the TV. And the best part is that you don't need a computer to use it. Just connect the roku box or apple t-v to your t-v and wireless network.

Stalions also uses a digital antenna. With that, he's able to catch many of his favorite NBC (and other network) shows for free and in high definition.
Read More: Cutting the cable, satellite cord

The combination of free over the air (wireless) television and internet streaming has already made the cable industry the next "buggy whip manufacturing" trade group. It only thing missing is the fact that many Americans don't yet realize that they are paying large amounts of money for nothing. Actually, in many cases, they are paying someone to degrade their picture quality. What a deal!!!
 

FOX TV

Contributor
#2
This is exactly why I am trying to patent my exceptional antenna design. I wish I could post some pictures, but I simply cannot give away my secret, and since all of my designs are prototypes, it would then be obvious what the secret to my design is. Lets hope it goes well for me, and I can solve many of the reception issues I see on here that have a combination of VHF and UHF channels in their market.

The future success of Broadcast TV lies in the hands of our Congressmen, and they seem very willing to relegate this wonderful technology to the history books in favor of the Broadband Robber Barons. Write to your representatives, and tell them you don't want to give up your free TV for the profits of the Broadband spectrum hogs.
 

Chips

DTVUSA Member
#3
Lets hope it goes well for me, and I can solve many of the reception issues I see on here that have a combination of VHF and UHF channels in their market.
Fox I hope you good success with your design. My personal opinion about DTV reception, is the major problem is dealing with multi-path signals. Unlike analog, you can't see multi-path signals in DTV, but they will take away your signal. I disagree with you and Jim, as far as whether amplifying an antenna is ever needed, where I live I get nothing without a pre-amp on my antenna, although I have help friends set up old antennas I had, with and without amps. I don't have time to write it, but I have some experiences with amps and what I suspect is multi-path problems. With my laptop, I can pickup a lot signals on any tall hill, just using a rabbit ear, but the real test for any antenna, is how it works in valley, looking into a lot of hills and obliviously multi-path rejections. I am looking forward to seeing how your antenna design works, and I hope it works great.
 
#4
I disagree with you and Jim, as far as whether amplifying an antenna is ever needed, where I live I get nothing without a pre-amp on my antenna,
With some setups, an amp may definitely be needed. The math seems pretty clear on that. My questions to you -- hopefully easy ones -- are:
1) Do you have more than 20 feet of cable between your antenna and TV?
2) Do you have a splitter, or other noise factors between antenna and TV?
3) Any possibility you have an unusually noisy amp in your TV? (Ever try a different TV?)

If any one of those 3 apply, then I believe conventional wisdom agrees you might need a pre-amp.

looking forward to seeing how your antenna design works, and I hope it works great.
Hear, hear!

Rick
 

Chips

DTVUSA Member
#5
With some setups, an amp may definitely be needed. The math seems pretty clear on that. My questions to you -- hopefully easy ones -- are:
1) Do you have more than 20 feet of cable between your antenna and TV?
2) Do you have a splitter, or other noise factors between antenna and TV?
3) Any possibility you have an unusually noisy amp in your TV? (Ever try a different TV?)

If any one of those 3 apply, then I believe conventional wisdom agrees you might need a pre-amp.Rick
Actually I been using an antenna for over 3 years now and my set-up has change several ways in that time. My first set-up, I ran 50 feet of RG-6, no amp, using a converter box, and knowing the RF of the stations I could get the box register a little signal, but not enough signal to get a picture. Then I added the amp, and I had a picture. I now have a different antenna, with about 25 feet more height and split between four receivers, two of which are HD sets.
When setting up an old UHF yagi, using my old converter box, to help a friend get OTA, I found the amp improve reception, at least kind of. We ran 30 feet of RG-6, no amp, but although he is 15 air miles closer to the transmitter then I am, we were looking straight into a hill, so we got one Buffalo, NY station, and if I turn the antenna, about 60 degrees, we could get another station. I then added, I cheap 10 db inline amp I got months earlier on Ebay, I might add a very cheap inline amp. With the amp, I got one more stations, but lest then a week later, I got a call, they lost their TV signals, so I stop on the way home from work, and it was easy to see, it was the inline amp, went bad, so I took it out, they were back to one station (with one sub-channel). So we decided to add a better amp, a 28 db amp, I put it in, but I no longer got the second station, which was a really good signal
with 10 db, but gone with 28 db, however with the 28 db amp, we were able to split the difference with the antenna and get the station 60 degrees above the other, so with sub-channels, they got 5 stations and were happy with that and over a year later it is still the same. I suspect, the the problem was multi-path signals, when I increase the db in the amp, I most likely amp a multi-path signal and the receiver, could not decipher which signal to decode.
 

jacorona

DTVUSA Rookie
#6
Read More: Cutting the cable, satellite cord

The combination of free over the air (wireless) television and internet streaming has already made the cable industry the next "buggy whip manufacturing" trade group. It only thing missing is the fact that many Americans don't yet realize that they are paying large amounts of money for nothing. Actually, in many cases, they are paying someone to degrade their picture quality. What a deal!!!
Cable and Satellite are on their way out for sure man. That's why you see big money guys investing in online now, like Carlos Slim with Ora.tv and Carl Icahn with Netflix.
 
#7
I put it in, but I no longer got the second station, which was a really good signal with 10 db, but gone with 28 db ... I suspect the problem was multi-path signals, when I increase the db in the amp, I most likely amp a multi-path signal, and the receiver could not decipher which signal to decode.
That's an intriguing theory! It'd be nice to know if there's a station in the area broadcasting one channel away. Also, maybe a more selective tuner could get all three stations for your friend.

Rick
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
G Questions and Answers 0
Top