Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner

Buffalo channel changes?

9912 Views 68 Replies 17 Participants Last post by  ExDilbert
Hello All;

I have been away for a while and recently got back into OTA.
I live in Bolton, Ontario and have always had a DB4E antenna with a Kitztech KT-200 pre amp...I have always had a consistent 35 to 40 channels based on weather.

Now I average 24 channels and sometimes up to 30..I find that i get the 51 series channels strong..but I am having tough times with 2.1,2.2,2.3,2.4,7.1,7.2,7.3,7.4,23.1,23.2 channels which I used to always have consistently before. I have tried another pre-amp (clearstream juice) and another few antennas (DB2E and Eaglestar pro and a cm4221) and all give me the same results.

Does this have something to do with the re-pack of u.s channels?/ I just got back into ota after years of subscribing to cable so this is odd to me. I have tried to re-aim and still I only get the mentioned channels intermitantly.

Can someone out there please give me some advice?


1 - 6 of 69 Posts
The subchannels are not licensed for carriage in Canada. They probably never will be. One of the TV service providers in Canada would need to apply to the CRTC for carriage and then it would need to go through hearings with probable objections from other TV services and broadcasters who make money from selling similar content. By the time it's over, one or more the subchannels may have rebranded and would need to reapply.

Why do I think this? I highly doubt Rogers or Bell would ever apply to carry more US stations as they have been dropping US stations for years with no new ones added. It took almost two decades to get FOX approved for carriage in Canada. The CW (and its predecessors) has never been approved and exists as part of a legacy add-on package known known as "US Superstations", some of which switched from independent stations with satellite carriage to OTA CW affiliates years ago. Those stations were originally approved to pad out premium movie packages in order to make them more appealing to Canadians.
See less See more
The CBC is already planning to shut down all their transmitters. That's after abandoning its promise to serve 90% of Canadians with OTA and already shutting down most of them about 12 years ago. CTV has already applied to be exempted from simsub station requirements so it can shut down its transmitters. The writing is on the wall, Canadian OTA is going away as soon as soon it is financially viable so why would they expand or upgrade service by using subchannels? The CRTC opposed the CBC decision but has no power to stop it. The CRTC refused CTV's application, keeping most CTV transmitters operational. Subchannels are allowed by the CRTC but no broadcasters have applied to add them. So why is lack of subchannels the CRTC's fault?
The CRTC does not have the legal power to force anyone to broadcast. The best they can do is apply conditions on licenses that meet government mandated guidelines. If the CBC wants to drop its broadcasting license and go 100% OTT, which is largely unregulated, the CRTC cannot stop it. The government could increase the CRTC's power but I don't see that happening. Many, maybe most, Canadians seem to want the opposite. Since the CBC is a crown corporation, the government could change its mandate but it would need to fund any extra costs or deal with operating losses in other ways.
Bell doesn't want to do that for free either. It wants to make Canadians pay for one of their TV services plus their streaming service to watch their programming. That's about $100/mo for what US viewers can get for about $10 with ads or $20 without ads. Bell does have a free service but it's its similar to content that US viewers can get OTA or by streaming for free.
FreeView is also on satellite in the UK. The downside is that Freeview and the BBC are supported by a TV tax that amounts to over $200/year. When the taxes on current TV services and money thrown at the CBC, government supported program productions and other related activities, are added up the cost to Canadians probably exceeds that already. The TV tax is unpopular in UK but the private alternatives are much more expensive. Never mind that the almost equivalent basic TV service mandated by the CRTC amounts to over twice as much by the time Canadian TV services add hardware rentals and other charges and it delivers less. Something like Freeview will never be available in Canada due to misinformation and government lobbying by the owners of the incumbent TV services. It needed to be mandated over 30 years ago, before big Canadian corporations gained a stranglehold on broadcasting in Canada.

Interestingly, privately owned digital OTA in the US delivers something similar to Freeview due to better regulatory decision making there and it's completely free. Just across the border in Canada, poor regulatory decisions resulted in the exact opposite.
See less See more
Most likely, geosynchronous satellite TV will also be shut down by then. It's also possible that regulatory decisions will block the reception of US TV in Canada difficult due to geo-blocking with ATSC 3. IPTV and OTT streaming will soon replace conventional TV. The only questions that remain are; will ATSC 3 signals be geo-blocked, who will be the winners in the streaming financial shakeout and how heavily will OTT be regulated?
1 - 6 of 69 Posts