NYC and LA HD Locals launched and available!

[waltinvt]

<snip>.....According to the "uninformed" Natalie at the CEOs office it is ILLEGAL for dish to provide HD DNS . What a crock that a company the size of dish cannot even read the FCC rules correctly as it pretains to the current analog model in place for DNS.... Gerry

For being on the "Executive Resolution Team" she seemed kind of uninformed in my opinion. Also, she didn't follow through on something she told me she would do.

 

[Fgsilva]

I just spoke with a CSR whom said that, if I got their new MPG4 equipment I would be able to get the LA HD feeds for ABC, CBS and Fox for which I already have waivers. Not sure if I trust her as she also said I'd get the NY feeds if I have another dish pointed at 61.5!

For being on the "Executive Resolution Team" she seemed kind of uninformed in my opinion. Also, she didn't follow through on something she told me she would do.

 

[BobMurdoch]

Just once I'd like to start a conversation with a CSR by saying that "This conversation is being recorded for quality control purposes by me as well........."

As of right now, NO ONE with analog waivers is getting their digital counterparts unless things have changed again (they were active for 24 hours before they were yanked.... which tells me that someone thinks that they are not allowed to give them to you).

Don't blame E*, blame your congresspeople. Write them if you think the law should be changed. E* would turn on every local broadcast channel that they could as long as they could charge for it. This is strictly a legal restriction....

 

[waltinvt]

Just once I'd like to start a conversation with a CSR by saying that "This conversation is being recorded for quality control purposes by me as well........."

As of right now, NO ONE with analog waivers is getting their digital counterparts unless things have changed again (they were active for 24 hours before they were yanked.... which tells me that someone thinks that they are not allowed to give them to you).

Don't blame E*, blame your congresspeople. Write them if you think the law should be changed. E* would turn on every local broadcast channel that they could as long as they could charge for it. This is strictly a legal restriction....

For the umteenth time:

Yes, you can blame congress for the ambigiouse legislation and the FCC for it's laxness on issuing rules and clarifications but this one's on Dish I'm afraid. Per the FCC's own words:

Distant Digital Signals
In general, if a satellite carrier offers local-into-local digital signals in your area, it is not allowed to offer you distant digital signals, unless you were receiving distant digital signals as of December 8, 2004. At this time, local into local digital signals are offered in a limited number of areas.

Subscribers who are "unserved" with respect to analog service are eligible for distant digital signals.

Satellite companies are not required to offer distant digital signals.

See: http://ftp.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/shvera.html

I'm not going into it all again here since I've posted it many times already but in a nutshell, Dish hasn't done HD DNS yet because it's not worth it to them $$$ wise - at least untill the digital testing becomes available April 30th but they'd rather imply it's because of the law.

The truth is they can legally provide HD DNS just like "D" does any time they want to. Trouble is, they can't make any additional money giving you HD distants(they already charge you 1.5 ea for the analog distants.) like they can with HD Locals packages.

 

[BoisePaul]

In general, if a satellite carrier offers local-into-local digital signals in your area, it is not allowed to offer you distant digital signals, unless you were receiving distant digital signals as of December 8, 2004. At this time, local into local digital signals are offered in a limited number of areas.

I wonder if E* is afraid that someone will take them to court over the fact that the SD LiL signal they offer is transmitted digitally over satellite, even if the originating broadcast is analog. In some twisted mind, that may equate to "local-into-local digital signals", even though a more accurate description would be "local-into-local analog signals delivered digitally". We know that's not the spirit of SHREVA, but there may be some local affiliates who are so against anyone in their DMA seeing any signal other than theirs (even if theirs is not available) that they may try to exploit this ambiguity in some uninformed court.

 

[BobMurdoch]

I don't think it is a money issue, because I will be getting HD Networks for free once my 622 gets hooked up as I already pay for their analog counterparts.

There has to be some other reason for the holdup.

Sounds like a good question for the people who try and sneak through the screeners on the chats.......

 

[NightRyder]

Remember, it took D* many months before they formally offered HD-DNS.

I think the hold up could be a couple of things.

1. Not having the processes in place to verify qualification.

2. They don't want to do anything that could complicate their HD-LIL negotiations.


NightRyder

 

[waltinvt]

I wonder if E* is afraid that someone will take them to court over the fact that the SD LiL signal they offer is transmitted digitally over satellite, even if the originating broadcast is analog. In some twisted mind, that may equate to "local-into-local digital signals", even though a more accurate description would be "local-into-local analog signals delivered digitally". We know that's not the spirit of SHREVA, but there may be some local affiliates who are so against anyone in their DMA seeing any signal other than theirs (even if theirs is not available) that they may try to exploit this ambiguity in some uninformed court.

The law's ambigious but not that ambigious

 

[waltinvt]

I don't think it is a money issue, because I will be getting HD Networks for free once my 622 gets hooked up as I already pay for their analog counterparts.

There has to be some other reason for the holdup.

Sounds like a good question for the people who try and sneak through the screeners on the chats.......

Bob, Can you elaborate on just how you will be "getting your HD Networks for free" just because you'll be getting a 622 hooked up? Unless you're (sorry I didn't notice) living in one of the few HD LiL areas.

The point I was trying to make but apparently not articulating very well is that Dish can't really bring in any new money by providing HD DNS. To get HD DNS under SHVERA, you have to qualify by being "unserved" for analog in which case you're probably already getting and paying for the analog distants, in which case any HD distants Dish puts up would be free.
BUT
If Dish puts up HD LiLs in your area and you want them, you have to sub to analog LiLs too.(distants go away) So Dish gets to charge you for a locals package which has a lot less incurred costs associated with it than distants (no waivers or signal predictions or testing or risks plus most areas will be spotbeam bandwidth vs conus)