Rumble TV / Ammerican Horror 97w

[Karl Q]

Good point. So then that begs the question: Why go satellite?

 

[JFOK]

Hi All,

I wonder why Peter Fairlie hasn’t responded to our inquires as to what happened with his Rumble/American Horror Classics. He seemed to be in touch with the FTA community recently, looking for feedback.

John

 

[primestar31]

Hi All,

I wonder why Peter Fairlie hasn’t responded to our inquires as to what happened with his Rumble/American Horror Classics. He seemed to be in touch with the FTA community recently, looking for feedback.

John

We can't know until he replies. However as I said above, he HAS logged in in the last 24 hours, and I assume he's read the new replies on this thread. Please take careful consideration in comments and go easy, until we know what's what. I'm sure there's disappointment out there, but we should give him kudos for the attempt, and hopefully he can pull it off somehow.

 

[Karl Q]

I am not meaning to undermine his reasoning for broadcasting on satellite with such questions of cost. I think it's cool that he has chosen it and is attempting to give the satellite hobbiests something else interesting to watch.

 

[Titanium]

The link budget cost will vary on popularity of the satellite, length of contract, bandwidth, footprint, power levels, priority and services provided. Over the years I have worked with dozens of services and their satellite leases. For comparison, a simple turn of a radio service on an unpopular and inclined orbit satellite could be under $1k per month. A good quality HD video channel on a popular bird could be $30k or more. A typical SD TV channel on 97w KU might be contracted for $12-$17k.

If a service isn't needing to be grouped with like services (for example expat channels on 97w), great deals are to be found on less popular satellites. The downside to being on a less popular satellite is that the downlinker may not have available hardware to pick-up the service from a different satellite and the service might have an increased hardware budget to provide their channel to contracted carriers.

Satellite distribution is the most economical way to distribute if the network will be more than 15-20 downlinks. With IP/fiber distribution, the operating cost increases with each drop. With satellite, this cost decreases with each downlink.

 

[Karl Q]

The link budget cost will vary on popularity of the satellite, length of contract, bandwidth, footprint, power levels, priority and services provided. Over the years I have worked with dozens of services and their satellite leases. For comparison, a simple turn of a radio service on an unpopular and inclined orbit satellite could be under $1k per month. A good quality HD video channel on a popular bird could be $30k or more. A typical SD TV channel on 97w KU might be contracted for $12-$17k.

If a service isn't needing to be grouped with like services (for example expat channels on 97w), great deals are to be found on less popular satellites. The downside to being on a less popular satellite is that the downlinker may not have available hardware to pick-up the service from a different satellite and the service might have an increased hardware budget to provide their channel to contracted carriers.

Satellite distribution is the most economical way to distribute if the network will be more than 15-20 downlinks. With IP/fiber distribution, the operating cost increases with each drop. With satellite, this cost decreases with each downlink.

Thanks Titanium. Nicely condensed!

 

[iBoston]

I guess that seals the coffin.

 

[FTA4PA]

I guess that seals the coffin.


View attachment 131884

 

[iBoston]

I was really looking forward to it being i have a fix on 97w. I guess the funding ran dry. I recorded the loop on the American Horror classics, so ill always have that to reflect...




RIP

 

[FTA4PA]

I was really looking forward to it being i have a fix on 97w. I guess the funding ran dry. I recorded the loop on the American Horror classics, so ill always have that to reflect...




RIP

I wasn't interested in Rumble TV myself but was eagerly awaiting AHC. Oh well, such is the way of FTA!

 

[comfortably_numb]

Satellite distribution is the most economical way to distribute if the network will be more than 15-20 downlinks. With IP/fiber distribution, the operating cost increases with each drop. With satellite, this cost decreases with each downlink.

I've been looking for this statistic for a long time. When people ask me, "Why does anyone put anything on a satellite anymore?" now I can give them an educated answer.

It also seems to me that retailers in rural areas or areas underserved by ISP's can take advantage of satellite broadcasts, especially for music.

 

[zap]

The domain rumbletv.net seems to work for me. If it was renewed then that's a good sign.

 

[Horsepower]

I hope I'm still wrong, but I called BS on this whole thing months ago. What's the problem now?

 

[iBoston]

Not holding my breath.

 

[zap]

There is a new signal on G19 3933V as of today. Is that them? are they back? anyone else getting a lock on it?

 

[zap]

OK confirmed it was Rumble TV, however they seem to have dropped the carrier again. That was interesting to see. Looks like they are still around.

 

[primestar31]

OK confirmed it was Rumble TV, however they seem to have dropped the carrier again. That was interesting to see. Looks like they are still around.

He used to post here. I wish he'd post again to let us know if it's possible for them to really launch. Heck, maybe even do some crowd sourcing for money.