Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums

Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums (https://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/)
-   OTA Station & Network Operational Status (https://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/220-ota-station-network-operational-status/)
-   -   Global Network DTV Transition Status (closed) (https://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/220-ota-station-network-operational-status/128235-global-network-dtv-transition-status-closed.html)

pwconsulting 2011-04-17 07:50 PM

Anntenna-Global
 
Well here is hopping they get it sooner then later. I like the Idea about putting the antenna in Woodstock, that way they can penetrate London Better. I wrote them a letter, I hope they read it and get back to me. Tomorrow we find out if Sun will be keeping around with the new Sun News Network. If they do, maybe we will still have 19.1 around. I think though that Global should be putting a station in London. I got a quick question to ask about the sub channels. If CRTC, only lets the sub channels to be Canadian Content could that possibly mean that we could have a sub channel of CP24? Just a question.

roger1818 2011-04-18 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jase88 (Post 1249864)
Well, Bell/CTV, CBC, Rogers, and Shaw all have the money to convert every conventional broadcast transmitter in Canada.

I don't agree with this statement. Rogers definitely has enough money to convert all their transmitters (they actually are) since they don't have many. Shaw likely does (they have quite a few, but Shaw has deep pockets). Bell might have enough money (CTV/A has more transmitters than Shaw and Rogers combined). But I highly doubt if the CBC has enough money to convert all 700+ transmitters they have nationwide. If you estimate an average cost of $400,000 per transmitter (probably an under estimate), that would be more than 280 billion dollars! I somehow doubt they have that much cash lying around.

pwconsulting 2011-04-18 12:50 PM

Global CAsh
 
Yes, But you just can not turn off a television station in a market with over 300 thousand People either like they are doing in London. What I am asking, is why is OTA for Global such a big deal. Is it because they are owned by a cable station, that would rather you watch Sat, or cable?

j0dest3r 2011-04-18 12:58 PM

Of course they would rather you pay them for a subscription rather than watching content for free. Converting to digital transmitters was part of the deal though with them taking over Global. I still think it is more important to have the eyeballs regardless of the delivery medium.

Jase88 2011-04-18 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roger1818 (Post 1250119)
I don't agree with this statement. If you estimate an average cost of $400,000 per transmitter (probably an under estimate), that would be more than 280 billion dollars! I somehow doubt they (CBC) have that much cash lying around.

First off, I don't believe the cost of digital conversion is as high as the stations claim. Secondly, the CBC doesn't have 700+ full power transmitters. And thirdly, the CBC hosts transmission sites for other stations. In other words, they earn revenue off their transmission facilities. This revenue could easily offset digital upgrades.

Dave Loudin 2011-04-18 01:54 PM

Actually, you should believe what the stations say are the costs of conversion to DTV.

Jase88 2011-04-18 02:01 PM

I've carefully looked over many conversion estimates, and I've seen plenty of entries that don't appear to be necessary for conversion. For example, not all situations call for a new antenna. Yet there is a expensive line item in most proposals that includes antenna replacement. None of the proposals factors in savings due to reduced energy requirements. And while capital expenditures are indeed separate from operating expenses, there will be efficiencies that should be factored into the project.

And I'm inclined to believe that numbers have been "bumped up" to support their campaign for carriage fees and/or carriage fee negotiation.

Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying that a digital conversion is cheap. I just don't believe it's as costly as it has been portrayed by the stations.

roger1818 2011-04-18 03:10 PM

Take a look at the report Cost Estimate of Digital Television (DTV) Conversion for Canada generated by the CRTC (not the stations). It says the average cost for a VHF station will be $246,718 and a UHF station will be $1,033,954.

Regarding the number of transmitters, it is true they aren't all full power, but you said all transmitters, not just the full power ones. Also Shaw promised they will transition all transmitters, not just the full power ones, so that was my point of reference (this is the Global Network DTV Transition Status thread after all).

As for the revenue received for hosting other stations, that isn't new revenue and is already being used to cover other expenses.

Regarding energy saved, that will happen over time and can help with the amortization of costs over time, but it doesn't help with the up front cost.

Jase88 2011-04-18 04:10 PM

The information the CRTC is relying upon is coming from the industry itself.

This isn't the thread for such a debate. My point is and was that the industry can support a ubiquitous digital transition. The issue is that in most cases, they don't want to.

pwconsulting 2011-04-19 05:48 PM

Transition
 
Phil McLeod (Blogger) has asked me how much it will cost to transfer to digital, if the tower is already there. Can you give me an update on that

Emerald_Boar 2011-04-19 06:08 PM


Jase88 2011-04-19 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pwconsulting (Post 1250834)
Phil McLeod (Blogger) has asked me how much it will cost to transfer to digital, if the tower is already there. Can you give me an update on that

I would steer the debate away from the costs. The CBC has stated that even if they were given a significant amount of cash, they wouldn't spend it on a digital conversion. They already get $1B a year from the government.

roger1818 2011-04-20 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jase88 (Post 1250259)
The information the CRTC is relying upon is coming from the industry itself.

No, according to the report it came from Spectrum expert (an engineering consulting firm) not the broadcasters.

downbeat 2011-04-20 02:55 PM

CIII-DT-7 Midland approved
 
According to Stampeder's mirror of the Industry Canada database, CIII-DT-7 Midland, Ont., has been approved by the CRTC.

Midland; Ch. 7; CIII-DT-7; 346.7 m HAAT; 6750 watts max.; 3630 max avg.

pwconsulting 2011-04-28 10:45 AM

Global
 
Why does Woodstock have to change their tower for City TV, when in Oil Springs, which reaches London Global does not have to... Does anyone know?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:42 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome