FCC Acts To Assist Analog Cable Subs

[Geronimo]

The FCC has put in place rules that will guarantee that analog cable cusomers will still ahve access to broadcast locals till February 2012.



Politics | FCC rules affect cable after digital switchover | Seattle Times Newspaper

[David_Levin]

This is important stuff.
What did they do?

Did they pass a rule forcing cable to keep analog alive? Does this mean that they also passed a rule allowing the downconversion of Digital to Analog ? Does this help the sats keep locals alive where they don't yet carry HD?

How about the rules on bit-for-bit and compression ?

[JohnL]

This is important stuff.
What did they do?

Did they pass a rule forcing cable to keep analog alive? Does this mean that they also passed a rule allowing the downconversion of Digital to Analog ? Does this help the sats keep locals alive where they don't yet carry HD?

How about the rules on bit-for-bit and compression ?

David,

The details are sparse, but the one thing for sure is this will have consequences. YES, the FCC is requiring Cable to maintain Analog cable until 2012, three years past the Digital OTA migration date of February 17, 2009.

Requiring Analog Cable to continue does NOT allow Cable to reclaim all that bandwidth used for analog cable channels which the cable industry desperately needs for their migration to offering A LOT more HD and other services.

If Cable was allowed to remove Analog cable completely they then could require a STB for each Service drop. This would level the playing field with Satellite. Many Potential Satellite Suubscribers balk at churning to satellite as it requires a STB for each TV in their home. The Biggest advantage to Cable is to remove all that wasted Analog bandwidth.

The switch to all Digital would give Cable A LOT of bandwidth for HD additions as using MPEG4 could mean Cable can add HD channels in an almost one for one ratio for each removed analog channel. With that said Cable has yet to embrace MPEG4 for service into the home as it requires replacing each and every STB in the field NOW.

Yes, the industry in general whether Cable or Satellite has challenges. Cable has some advantages, as well as disadvantages, as does Satellite.

Both DBS companies have moved WAY ahead of Cable in HD additions, all the while Cable has insisted on broadening their services from TV, to Phone, and broadband internet, or the "Triple Play". While many have been drawn to these triple play offerings, they are not always the best deal in terms of service or especially price. Personally I find my Satellite service MUCH BETTER than the local CABLE TV product, but the local Cable Broadband is the best option albeitly the price is a little high (although if you play the game right you can get a deal), lastly my local Cable Companies IP Phone is VERY EXPENSIVE even with the "TRIPLE Play savings" my Vonage service offers much more for VASTLY LESS.

Just because you are getting "ONE" bill instead of three does NOT mean a DE-bundled set of services isn't better or cheaper.

Requiring the continuation of Analog Cable in general will please the low end of the Subscriber base, but in this business the high dollar sub is where the profits are. So the FCC is essentially protecting the low Dollar basic sub, while screwing over the Cable Companies and the high dollar subscribers that want more and better services. In the past before DBS, and the new Telcos TV services this might have been a good idea, but with all the options now available from competition, this is NOT necessary.

I say let the industry determine its OWN path instead of forcing a path that serves to protect the lowest dollar subscriber. In general with many areas getting Fiber into the home from new comers, and DBS pushing forward with MPEG4, requiring cable to maintain Analog Cable for three years past the Digital change over is ridiculous.

If you are going to require something then why not require Cable to provide a Limited SUBset of Analog channels for those that refuse to get STB's for each TV in the home.

With all this said the biggest hurt would be to large Hotel chains, with local analog cable service into each room, requiring either a costly Headend system (instead of regular Analog Cable to each room) or requiring each Hotel room to have a Cable Company STB (of which some are likely to disappear into guests Luggage). These Large Hotel Chains are VERY profitable and can afford the costs of this change over.

John

[Geronimo]

This is important stuff.
What did they do?

Did they pass a rule forcing cable to keep analog alive? Does this mean that they also passed a rule allowing the downconversion of Digital to Analog ? Does this help the sats keep locals alive where they don't yet carry HD?

How about the rules on bit-for-bit and compression ?

it appears that all they did was require an analog tier for local broadcast channels until that date.

[David_Levin]

I say let the industry determine its OWN path instead of forcing a path that serves to protect the lowest dollar subscriber. In general with many areas getting Fiber into the home from new comers, and DBS pushing forward with MPEG4, requiring cable to maintain Analog Cable for three years past the Digital change over is ridiculous.

Given a choice, I'd let cable and dbs do pretty much whatever they want. Let competition and consumer $$$ keep them in line.

Some of the articles I read saw this as a win for cable. They were afraid the rule would last way longer then 3 years, and there's an out for small and all-digital providers.

(hot off the press)

Hot Off The Press: The Latest TV News and Information - Page 283 - AVS Forum

I don't see cable immediately getting rid of analog either way. It's a huge selling point for them. Even the hi-end subs probably have some anceliary TV and DVD recorders hooked directly to the wire.

Mostly, I've been concerned about the bit-4-bit rule. This could really hurt cable and dbs. I've been hoping a mandate to maintain analog would also mean the allowance to downconvert (and recompress). It still wasn't mentioned if the analog for cable would be provided by the network, or downconverted from hi-def.

[David_Levin]

Here's another good writeup:

Hot Off The Press: The Latest TV News and Information - Page 282 - AVS Forum

To insure that all must-carry TV stations are viewable by all subscribers after the switch to all digital broadcasting, cable operators will be required, in addition to carry a digital signal, to convert a digital signal to analog, either at the headend or with a converter box, for their analog cable customers.

The converter box comment is interesting. So cable could choose to provide a no-charge stb w/ analog outputs and not carry analog on the coax? This also sounds like they are free do downconvert the HD Digital to create analog.

But in a victory for cable in general, the commissioners did not require cable systems to carry "all bits" that a broadcaster delivers, as had been initially proposed as a tightening of the mandate that cable not "materially degrade" the broadcast signal. Broadcasters had pushed for the "all bits" change to the degradation definition.

It appears cable got pretty much everything they wanted. This is to be expected. Without cable, the FCC wouldn't have a chance of cutting off Analog OTA in '09.

[Andrewwski]

I know someone who works for the local cable company (TW), he says they're doing some heavy research into using unencrypted QAM for the basic package...hence any newer TV or OTA STB could tune it at no extra charge. Cable Co. STB's would be necessary for subscription packages.

[David_Levin]

I know someone who works for the local cable company (TW), he says they're doing some heavy research into using unencrypted QAM for the basic package

Aren't the locals already on unencrypted QAM on most cable systems? I believe that is the case here in Denver. People w/ QAM tuners can watch SD & HD digital locals w/o a box.

Only annoyance is finding the channels, and sometimes Comcast moves them around (there's no channel mapping).

[Andrewwski]

The locals, yes, but not much more. What we're talking about is the entire basic package.

[Geronimo]

I could be mistaken but I think that they simply said that broadcast locals have to available in analog and nothing more----and they seem to allow for using an STB to accomplish that.