CBC gets administrative renewal until Aug. 31, 2012.
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2011/2011-215.htm
Includes the following condition:
The Commission notes that it does not intend to renew authorizations for full-power analog transmitters operating in the mandatory markets or on channels 52 to 69 outside the mandatory markets beyond 31 August 2011. By that time, the Commission expects licensees to have the necessary authority to broadcast in digital. In addition, the Commission imposes the following condition of licence on the stations listed in the appendix to this decision that operate in mandatory markets or on channels 52 to 69 outside the mandatory markets:
"Unless otherwise authorized by the Commission, the licensee shall not transmit analog television signals after 31 August 2011 in mandatory markets designated as such by the Commission in Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2011-184 or transmit television signals on channels 52 to 69."

So it doesn't look like the CRTC is prepared to give CBC exceptions to DTV conversion in mandatory markets.

If they don't have an analog signal, and don't provide a digital signal, then the CRTC should force BDU's to pull the local station from their systems immediately and not allow signal substitution of another feed.

If they don't have an analog signal, and don't provide a digital signal, then the CRTC should force BDU's to pull the local station from their systems immediately and not allow signal substitution of another feed.
Big Deal. I think that the CBC will be dropping Jeopardy and Wheel of Fortune -- I don't think they simsub anything else.

If they don't have an analog signal, and don't provide a digital signal, then the CRTC should force BDU's to pull the local station from their systems immediately and not allow signal substitution of another feed.

Or provide the HD feed in clear QAM not requiring an STB.

Big Deal. I think that the CBC will be dropping Jeopardy and Wheel of Fortune -- I don't think they simsub anything else. I didn't mean simsub rules, I meant if (for example) CBAT were to go dark OTA (no analog or digital signal), then the BDUs should be forced to pull the station from their lineups and not allowed to offer another CBC feed, say CBLT, in its place.

Or provide the HD feed in clear QAM not requiring an STB. Clear QAM only would work IF every house access to cable, which they don't. So Bell and Shaw would need to offer open satellite access, which they wont.

I wouldn't be surprised if Bell and Shaw started offering unencrypted network HD when FreeHD (http://www.freehdcanada.ca/index.html) becomes operational. Neither of them wants another competitor in the satellite TV marketplace. OTOH, I think it's atrocious that CBC is not available FTA. Many countries provide unencrypted national TV feeds to their citizens, both at home and abroad. Just look at the number of international feeds available on FTA in North America.

I wouldn't be surprised if Bell and Shaw started offering unencrypted network HD when FreeHD (http://www.freehdcanada.ca/index.html) becomes operational.

How would that benefit cable companies? You'd still need to subscribe to a cable package. They'll never start hooking up everyone's cable whether you subscribe or not...

And the cable companies don't want to debunk the myth that you need a STB to receive HD channels. Customers might start asking, "if I can get some HD channels without a box, why can't I get all of them this way?".

I didn't mean simsub rules, I meant if (for example) CBAT were to go dark OTA (no analog or digital signal), then the BDUs should be forced to pull the station from their lineups and not allowed to offer another CBC feed, say CBLT, in its place.

Doesn't work that way. According to the CRTC rules, CBC stations are required on cable even if there is no local station. Carriage of a CBC station or an in-province educational station is required independent of whether there is a local transmitter.

Remember, CRTC regulations are based on the Broadcasting Act, and the CBC has a special status within the Broadcasting Act.

How would that benefit cable companies? You'd still need to subscribe to a cable package.
This question is a bit puzzling. I don't see why it would need to benefit cable companies at all. Cable customers would subscribe to free basic networks the same way that satellite customers would. That is, pay for the equipment and installation and then be given digital receiver authorization to only decode local stations. Analog stations can be blocked in areas where they are still available. I don't think I would be going too far out on a limb if I said that analog cable will be gone from almost all cable systems in 5 years. Then a digital receiver would be required for all channels.

I take it this means CBC can lauch in HD on a cable provider without having a transmitter up and running! (CBC Edmonton & Calgary launching April 1 as an example)

Doesn't work that way. According to the CRTC rules, CBC stations are required on cable even if there is no local station. Carriage of a CBC station or an in-province educational station is required independent of whether there is a local transmitter.

Remember, CRTC regulations are based on the Broadcasting Act, and the CBC has a special status within the Broadcasting Act.
I am not saying it is like that. I am well aware of that. But what I am saying is it should be ammended to be like that. It's more wishful thinking than anythng.

I don't think I would be going too far out on a limb if I said that analog cable will be gone from almost all cable systems in 5 years.

I am not convinced. I read an article a while back where someone from Rogers was quoted as saying that they analog cable gives them a competitive advantage over satellite as not everyone has or wants a digital box on every TV in their house. They may scale it back to basic service only, to free up bandwidth, but I do think it will be around for a more than 5 years. Not only will dropping analog service remove this advantage, but it might annoy some customers enough to switch.

Not all cable providers will necessarily see this market advantage however.

Agreed. The big markets will probably still have analog because there is still some use for it, especially with those who didn't grow up with technology. I also agree they may scale it to only the local stations and maybe a few news and sports networks. I could easily see the 2~72 range drop to 2~30 or 40.

I wouldn't be surprised if Bell and Shaw started offering unencrypted network HD when FreeHD (http://www.freehdcanada.ca/index.html) becomes operational. Neither of them wants another competitor in the satellite TV marketplace.

I would be very surprised if Bell/Shaw opened encryption on CBC, at least if they have WOF/Jeopardy, and NHL. The more likely scenario, to keep rights in check, is they will retain encryption, but authorize ordinary subscription receivers for a zero cost subscription. The private networks will never go without encrpytion on Ku or DBS, so long as they carry US network programming.

OTOH, I think it's atrocious that CBC is not available FTA. Many countries provide unencrypted national TV feeds to their citizens, both at home and abroad. Just look at the number of international feeds available on FTA in North America.
Almost none of them are "A class" developed nations, at elast available to North America, and of the ones that are FTA, they are largely news/info channels.

You have to remember that CBC TV runs itself as a commercial network.

For those hoping that CBC goes FTA, I gotta think it will never happen.

In order for them to do that, each originating station would have to have a FTA feed. This would mean that someone anywhere in the country, could watch any CBC feed, and thereby avoid the local ad spots for out of market ones.

Never gonna happen. You can't simsub FTA.

You can watch out of market locals on at least pay satellite BDUs now, and the networks (who own the stations) seem to mostly be fine with that.

Non-encryted FTA will not happen, as I said before, to mostly protect the rights of US broadcasters and specialty channels who carry the US/foreign programming, and NHL Hockey. Any free satellite will be encrpyted, and made available on proprietary hardware (the viewer bouys outright), for zero cost subscription.

The more likely scenario, to keep rights in check, is they will retain encryption, but authorize ordinary subscription receivers for a zero cost subscription.
You are correct. Slip of the tongue. I meant that Bell and Shaw would offer free local stations, like FreeHD, not unencrypted local stations.

I agree that CBC will not go FTA for the reasons given. But what about CBC News World? There is little reason why that should not be available FTA. It would be comparable to many other FTA services.

It is anti-competitive IMO for cable companies not to provide unencrypted local station digital access. People who use computer based PVRs and Tivo users would be happy. Also would differ them from their competitors. But alas it is more imortant to hang on to protectionist type behavious rather than think outside the box and give their customers something that is actually useful.

I posted a reply on Phil's blog and I'll repeat it here - the 7% number CBC is using to claim how "few" people use OTA comes from BBM survey data, where OTA penetration is deduced from cable and satellite penetration. It's a flawed statistic.

I know a lot of students at both Western and Fanshawe who rely on OTA. However, according to a manager I know at 106.9 The X at Fanshawe College, their station doesn't bother with BBM ratings because "students don't fill out BBM diaries". What this means on the CBC topic is that the BBM numbers likely don't take students and younger people into account who may be more likely to use OTA. And I think this demographic is likely to watch CBC on Saturday nights.

Yeah, excellent work pw -- we all really appreciate the push you are putting on. Also, everyone, be sure to go fire back on that blog comments section!