Another Spectrum Auction?

[TNGuy84]

It looks like they're going to explore cutting up more of the C-band spectrum to give away to 5G carriers. The same person at the FCC mentioned 5 years ago that he'd like to cut up more of the UHF band to give out to 5G.

FCC to Vote on AWS Auction, Inquiry into Upper C-Band

The agency's first meeting with Chairman Brendan Carr at the helm is set for Feb. 27.

broadbandbreakfast.com

FCC chair plans major C-band spectrum auction to 'power new connections'

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chair Brendan Carr revealed that the agency is considering auctioning off more C-band spectrum.

www.capacitymedia.com

I can't see them cutting anything more than 100MHz of spectrum. Otherwise, they might as well take the whole thing.

 

[comfortably_numb]

The same person at the FCC mentioned 5 years ago that he'd like to cut up more of the UHF band to give out to 5G.

I don't see how that would work. In some metro areas all available frequency is being used by OTA.

 

[TNGuy84]

If they were so determined to do so, wouldn't it be as simple as cutting much of the UHF spectrum and giving each market 2 or 3 lighthouse UHF towers as is the current set up with 3.0? Then, the 3.0 stations would be the only ones moving and the 1.0 stations would shut down. The consumer gets stuck with DRM, but they'd have only 2 or 3 towers to point an antenna at. As much as we'd like to see it, I don't think 3.0 is moving away. If anything, they're wanting to keep it due to all of the benefits on the broadcasters' side.

 

[navychop]

Bad idea to keep "repurposing" spectrum.

So one part of the gummint is trying to kill OTA by taking spectrum - and another is looking at speeding up ATSC 3?

Same left/right problem as always.

 

[kofi123]

I can't see them cutting anything more than 100MHz of spectrum. Otherwise, they might as well take the whole thing.

What they might consider is a proposal made during the planning stages of the previous C-band auction: create buffer zones around registered C-band dishes where 5G wouldn't be allowed, thereby maintaining C-band for satellite use in the vicinity of registered dishes, at least in theory. By definition, unregistered satellite dishes aren't entitled to protection from interference, so 5G would be free to use 4-4.2 GHz around those.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

I don't get the 5G thing. It was built up to be some life changing technology. And now we have 5G but in reality most of the 5G stuff I do are at about the same speeds 4G could do.

In doing testing it is very rare to find 5G speeds that make me say oh wow. In some cases and in some areas I have seen that 4G (or LTE) has been faster than the 5G services in the same area.

I just dont get the entire 5G is the future, thing.

 

[TNGuy84]

Oh, just wait until nearly the end of the decade when they start pushing 6G. It'll be "even faster".

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Wasnt it Bill Gates who said something like "64k will be more than any computer will ever need" ??

How fast is too fast.

 

[k4otl]

If they take more UHF channels, more stations will go back to where they were pre-2009, good ole Low-VHF. Not saying it's wonderful down there, but it was made to work in the past. I'd be okay since I've got a 'yuge old antenna on the roof that works fantastic on FM/High VHF (no Low VHF in my area ) In my area, they could put several stations down there and make room. Again, NOT SAYING I WOULD LOVE THAT, just saying it's a possibility, if they're gonna auction spectrum (NOT SAYING I WANT THAT), it's the least bad alternative to ATSC 3.0 crap.

Really, our expectations now (as far as programming/channel count) for OTA TV are higher than for analog TV, because analog only gave 3-4 channels, if we replicated that experience (not that it'd be wonderful), we'd only need 1 or 2 transmitters in an area as it stands now.

As far as taking more C-band, it's ridiculous. Although... if they did that then maybe it'd force sat uplinkers to use Ku-band a lot more. Who knows? RF spectrum is one issue where both sides agree=> sell it out for $$$ and make it harder for everyone else involved. 5G is marketing, Gigabit internet is marketing unless you're a gamer. It's all marketing and all sides are so full of it these days.

 

[primestar31]

Low VHF tv reception sucks now, and has for years. Most people have far too much local constant electrical noise to make it viable. It also requires a HUGE antenna to reliably receive it.

rabbit73

 

[mr3p]

Not based on any facts, just pure speculation... when the dust settles and ATSC 3.0 kicks in there will be DRM free channels but limited to 480i/p.

 

[navychop]

With crappy content. MAYBE local news and weather. They sure won't mention sports. That's for forking over $s.

 

[primestar31]

Not based on any facts, just pure speculation... when the dust settles and ATSC 3.0 kicks in there will be DRM free channels but limited to 480i/p.

ATSC 3.0 is DOA without a mandate. Whether DRM'ed or not.

 

[Bruce]

ATSC 3.0 is DOA without a mandate. Whether DRM'ed or not.

I agree, but I do love the uncompressed picture when watching Football.

But streaming is the future, advertisers love the forced commercials, plus the better metrics, of who is actually watching what, so they know where to advertise.

 

[comfortably_numb]

advertisers love the forced commercials

OTA commercials are "forced," unless you are using a DVR. Everybody watching the Super Bowl tomorrow will have "forced commercials."

 

[Bruce]

OTA commercials are "forced," unless you are using a DVR. Everybody watching the Super Bowl tomorrow will have "forced commercials."

And that is my point, if you have the with ads plans….forced.

The 60 Billion advertisers spend on Television Programming every year, which all of, just a few years ago, went to Traditional Cable Channels/Broadcast Networks, 17 Billion of that went to streaming in 2024, expected to be 20+ Billion in 2025.

 

[k4otl]

Low VHF tv reception sucks now, and has for years. Most people have far too much local constant electrical noise to make it viable. It also requires a HUGE antenna to reliably receive it.

rabbit73

Only experience I've had with Low VHF was our Channel 5 (now on UHF), and it was easiest station to receive when it was on Low VHF, we just used a High VHF/UHF combo and it worked fine, granted I live in a rural area fwiw. I even could pick it up by splitting the coax and hooking it to a metal HVAC vent, kinda wild. In urban areas and/or with indoor antennas it would definitely suck. OTA viewers would be minimizing their local noise much like AM listeners (occasional listener here) currently do. I think the power limits vary throughout the country (Zones?) for TV stations, in NE TN they seem to be able to run good power on VHF TV stations and FM stations.

We'll see what happens though. No use in us all worrying about tomorrow, "for tomorrow will worry about its own things. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble." Enjoy each day given to you, life is grand.

 

[Juan]

As long as potential bidders exist for Cband frequencies ..the government will sell it off...notice you never see any auction for AM frequencies

 

[Joe The Dragon]

ATSC 3.0 is DOA without a mandate. Whether DRM'ed or not.

IP / patent issues need to be worked out

 

[TNGuy84]

As long as potential bidders exist for Cband frequencies ..the government will sell it off...notice you never see any auction for AM frequencies

You'll never see any auction for AM because the band sucks and doesn't have much bandwidth at all. If you took out the entire AM radio band, you'd have 1.16MHz. TV requires about 6MHz of bandwidth. If anything, they should make that band all digital to allow multiple channels on one frequency with FM quality audio.

Only experience I've had with Low VHF was our Channel 5 (now on UHF), and it was easiest station to receive when it was on Low VHF, we just used a High VHF/UHF combo and it worked fine, granted I live in a rural area fwiw. I even could pick it up by splitting the coax and hooking it to a metal HVAC vent, kinda wild. In urban areas and/or with indoor antennas it would definitely suck. OTA viewers would be minimizing their local noise much like AM listeners (occasional listener here) currently do. I think the power limits vary throughout the country (Zones?) for TV stations, in NE TN they seem to be able to run good power on VHF TV stations and FM stations.

We'll see what happens though. No use in us all worrying about tomorrow, "for tomorrow will worry about its own things. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble." Enjoy each day given to you, life is grand.

I have a Low VHF station that's on channel 2 (54MHz) within a 30 mile range. That thing is about impossible to pick up from my location. Maybe yours was easier due to the fact that it was on the higher end of low VHF (less interference maybe at 76MHz?).