No more HD Distant Networks?

[jrt926]

The Commission continues to believe that it is appropriate to "grandfather" the eligibility of households in cases where a location was predicted to be unserved by a local network station using an adopted version of the digital ILLR model and the household at that location is receiving a signal of that network from a distant station by its satellite provider. This provision will avoid disruption of the existing services to which households have been accustomed to receiving if the Commission updates the digital ILLR model or a station modifies its transmission facilities. This grandfathering will apply only in cases where the household already is receiving a distant signal from its satellite provider prior to a change in the digital ILLR prediction model or in the coverage of the local station.

...satellite carriers are required to consider only the signals of network stations located in the subscriber's DMA in determining whether a subscriber is eligible for delivery of distant network signals


This is from Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2010 and not a reference to anything prior. Its effective date is 1/21/11.

I'm not a lawyer, but this might be why Dish wants the Distants back. Otherwise why would they care about AAD and their measly amount of customers. And the pain of training CSRs to handle all this crapola.

 

[Brussam]

I am amazed that DishTV wanting to offer DNS services again is question and yet the fact that irecTV is still in the DNS business isn't questioned at all. Same marketplace, same customer demographics.

Dish isn't out the DNS business because they wanted to. They are out of the DNS business because Charley played chicken with the broadcasters over certification of subscribers.

Dish wants to be in the DNS business for the very reason DirecTV stayed in the business. Is that so hard to understand?

 

[Tampa8]

I am amazed that DishTV wanting to offer DNS services again is question and yet the fact that irecTV is still in the DNS business isn't questioned at all. Same marketplace, same customer demographics.

Dish isn't out the DNS business because they wanted to. They are out of the DNS business because Charley played chicken with the broadcasters over certification of subscribers.

Dish wants to be in the DNS business for the very reason DirecTV stayed in the business. Is that so hard to understand?

Yes, very hard to understand.
Direct TV is in the Extra Innings business. Direct TV is in the NFL Sunday Ticket business. Direct TV is in the YES business. Same marketplace, same demographics. Dish by your reasoning would also be in those businesses, they aren't.

 

[Tampa8]

The Commission continues to believe that it is appropriate to "grandfather" the eligibility of households in cases where a location was predicted to be unserved by a local network station using an adopted version of the digital ILLR model and the household at that location is receiving a signal of that network from a distant station by its satellite provider. This provision will avoid disruption of the existing services to which households have been accustomed to receiving if the Commission updates the digital ILLR model or a station modifies its transmission facilities. This grandfathering will apply only in cases where the household already is receiving a distant signal from its satellite provider prior to a change in the digital ILLR prediction model or in the coverage of the local station.

...satellite carriers are required to consider only the signals of network stations located in the subscriber's DMA in determining whether a subscriber is eligible for delivery of distant network signals


This is from Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2010 and not a reference to anything prior. Its effective date is 1/21/11.

I'm not a lawyer, but this might be why Dish wants the Distants back. Otherwise why would they care about AAD and their measly amount of customers. And the pain of training CSRs to handle all this crapola.

My thinking is, we can read too much into that. My reading is simply that they don't have to take into account an out of DMA network, that has claim to the DMA in question. That indeed is the law at least up till now, and I have had first hand experience with that back when I was getting qualified.

If the law is now letting Dish give distants, as long as the person is not served by the free signal of the network, and the fact Dish has the locals does not make a difference, then yes, I would agree it would appear to me Dish would want to get back to giving distants.

 

[Brussam]

Yes, very hard to understand.
Direct TV is in the Extra Innings business. Direct TV is in the NFL Sunday Ticket business. Direct TV is in the YES business. Same marketplace, same demographics. Dish by your reasoning would also be in those businesses, they aren't.

I guess there might be some logic comparing specialty sports channels to major broadcast channels. Maybe...

 

[amoni]

I thought Charlie was fighting for the rights to offer distant networks because you can walk in any news shop in America and get the NY or LA Times. You can stream channels every day on line. I'm not getting the arguments the locals throw out about they need people to watch for the advertising sales. Stations don't rely on advertising anymore, they charge US to get them. And even if I do subscribe to NY or LA, I'm sure as hell not getting on a plane for a slice of pizza or a new car. It's ridiculous, it's 2012, Satelite has the ability. If anything, make it so one has to subscribe to their own locals to make them happy in order to get distants.

 

[Asket]

Just got a post card in the mail purporting to be from DISH. Says that they need to reconfigure my antenna for free and if they don't get to do that I will lose my HD channels. Well its a Dish 500 system
that I put up myself with a 211K receiver. Everything works fine. Since this is worded nebulously I suspect a scam since I find nothing to verify any such situation. Since I lost the HD Chicago from AAD
is it possible to get them back from DISH through grandfathering. Is this something that is cooking under the radar?

 

[johnwadams]

In my zip code, Direct is still doing what got Dish in trouble. We have an ABC station about 75 miles away that was a grade A signal prior to the digital transition, now it is dead for many, including me. My neighbors with Direct get NY networks in HD. Until this year I got nothing from Dish but could get nets from AAD. This year, Dish set up a spot beam in SD only for several counties in our area, but they have to import all except for the ABC station which they now up link in SD. I am not even sure that Direct up links this station. It was our only source of severe weather info, but that died for many of us after the digital transition. Don't know why. They were VHF and still are per antenna web.org.

 

[mike123abc]

Dumb question time. Does Dish have to pay broadcasters for distants at the same rate as they do for LiL?

No. The rate for distants is set. The DBS provider picks any station they want for a distant and pays a statutory copyright rate.

For LiL it is negotiated with each station.

 

[mike123abc]

The Commission continues to believe that it is appropriate to "grandfather" the eligibility of households in cases where a location was predicted to be unserved by a local network station using an adopted version of the digital ILLR model and the household at that location is receiving a signal of that network from a distant station by its satellite provider. This provision will avoid disruption of the existing services to which households have been accustomed to receiving if the Commission updates the digital ILLR model or a station modifies its transmission facilities. This grandfathering will apply only in cases where the household already is receiving a distant signal from its satellite provider prior to a change in the digital ILLR prediction model or in the coverage of the local station.

...satellite carriers are required to consider only the signals of network stations located in the subscriber's DMA in determining whether a subscriber is eligible for delivery of distant network signals

There is no grandfathering with Dish since Dish was out of the distants market. All customers are new customers to Dish Distants (if Dish goes back into the distants market).

Only stations in the DMA being considered is to cover the case where lets a market does not have an ABC affiliate. But there are ABC affiliates in adjacent markets. These adjacent ABC stations can be picked up OTA in parts of the market. Under the old rules those parts of the market that could pick up an adjacent ABC could not receive a distant ABC. They were not in a white area for ABC. Under the new rules Dish could simply provide a distant ABC (remember distant can be from anywhere including an adjacent market) to the entire DMA without having to follow FCC contour maps to see who would have to be excluded because they could in theory pick up the adjacent ABC.

 

[patrick80639]

Just got a post card in the mail purporting to be from DISH. Says that they need to reconfigure my antenna for free and if they don't get to do that I will lose my HD channels. Well its a Dish 500 system
that I put up myself with a 211K receiver. Everything works fine. Since this is worded nebulously I suspect a scam since I find nothing to verify any such situation. Since I lost the HD Chicago from AAD
is it possible to get them back from DISH through grandfathering. Is this something that is cooking under the radar?

The postcard is correct. You need a dish 1000 to get all the HD channels.

 

[jrt926]

A clarification on "grandfathering" ...
Satellite subscribers who are predicted to receive an over-the-air network signal of Grade B intensity but do not receive a signal of Grade A intensity and who had distant service terminated after July 11, 1999 and before October 31, 1999 or who received distant network signals on October 31, 1999 are considered “grandfathered” subscribers. If you are a grandfathered subscriber who, as of October 1, 2004, received distant television signals you may continue to receive the distant signals unless you choose to subscribe to local-into-local service.

 

[jsaturn]

I was a DirecTV sub from 1995 (early adopter) on till about 1-1/2 year ago, and with them, I was grandfathered for Distants, thanx to my location in the CO mountains, far from most transmitters. But I'm also an RV-er, and to get distants for my RV dish, the DTV guys said I had to have an all-new subscription for the RV DirecTV dish. And I was already paying them almost $140 per month for complete programming. They "gave" me the grandfathered distants, after the mid-2000s decision or whatever, but I had to choose from locals (Denver Metro Area) or the distants, so I chose distants.

Then I analyzed Dish's offerings, and saw that I could have the locals from Denver, at home, with the "spot beam", and that I could also use my second DVR 722 in my RV, with the Sobongo/AA Distants, and in HD yet!! Decision made. Comes first of 2011, Sobongo cuts me back to the SD distants. Which I currently have, and am thankful for, though I had, like many posters herein, become very very attached to distant HD!! So I am waiting to see how, and whether, Dish handles their reacquisition, if that's what it is, of the Distants market. Hugely critical for RV-ers and truckers, who rely on satellite for weather, news, and of course, entertainment. Will Dish, like DirecTV as outlined above, MAKE me choose between locals to Denver (and therefore lose the nets to my RV when, as is the case for 8 months of the year, I am traveling about) or will I be able to get, specifically to my RV's receiver, the (perhaps-to-be-offered) HD distants? Or will I lose distants altogether, to my RV, having only the spot beam to my CO mountain home, for receiving the locals out of Denver?

Man, this is complicated!

 

[Tampa8]

If dish does offer actual distants, and if they do it like they did before, you should be able to get whatever your locals are for your home, and designate a receiver that is to be kept in the RV, for a different set of distants. It did not require a separate subscription, as they authorized the distants only to that one receiver.

Now will they do it like before? Will they do it at all? Stayed tuned......

 

[Derwin0]

I thought Charlie was fighting for the rights to offer distant networks because you can walk in any news shop in America and get the NY or LA Times. You can stream channels every day on line. I'm not getting the arguments the locals throw out about they need people to watch for the advertising sales. Stations don't rely on advertising anymore, they charge US to get them. And even if I do subscribe to NY or LA, I'm sure as hell not getting on a plane for a slice of pizza or a new car. It's ridiculous, it's 2012, Satelite has the ability. If anything, make it so one has to subscribe to their own locals to make them happy in order to get distants.

That's the excuse Charlie gave.

The real reason was to make money, as the $5.00/DMA for distants was more than the statutory copyright fee. And since there were no extra facilities to maintain, it was pure profit.

Besides, the above is a bogus argument. Sure you can go into a newsstand anywhere and pick up a NY Times. That's because the NY Times chooses to be available in those areas. WABC (etc) don't choose so.

 

[makman]

Besides, the above is a bogus argument. Sure you can go into a newsstand anywhere and pick up a NY Times. That's because the NY Times chooses to be available in those areas. WABC (etc) don't choose so.

The New York Times only has the ability to make the choice to be sold everywhere because there is no federal law that bars them from being sold everywhere.

Mitch

 

[makman]

It did not require a separate subscription, as they authorized the distants only to that one receiver.

Actually, distants were authorized on all my receivers when I got them from DISH.

Mitch

 

[Juan]

A clarification on "grandfathering" ...
Satellite subscribers who are predicted to receive an over-the-air network signal of Grade B intensity but do not receive a signal of Grade A intensity and who had distant service terminated after July 11, 1999 and before October 31, 1999 or who received distant network signals on October 31, 1999 are considered “grandfathered” subscribers. If you are a grandfathered subscriber who, as of October 1, 2004, received distant television signals you may continue to receive the distant signals unless you choose to subscribe to local-into-local service.

thats analog

 

[jsaturn]

If dish does offer actual distants, and if they do it like they did before, you should be able to get whatever your locals are for your home, and designate a receiver that is to be kept in the RV, for a different set of distants. It did not require a separate subscription, as they authorized the distants only to that one receiver.

Now will they do it like before? Will they do it at all? Stayed tuned......

Hope you're right, Tampa. I recall calling the dopes at DirecTV, and their telling me, "You will HAVE to have a full, separate subscription to DirecTV for your RV..." and that really turned me off, though I have always, of course, loved the technology.
Especially since the advent of the 3-LNB Winegard autotracking dish for my RV, with HD capabilities.... push that button, the dish on the RV's roof looks for, and then finds, all three birds, adjusts the skew, and bammo - there's all the programming. Amazing.
Thanks for the reply!

 

[ljr01]

I recall calling the dopes at DirecTV, and their telling me, "You will HAVE to have a full, separate subscription to DirecTV for your RV..."

Uh oh...that's exactly what several Dish CSRs told me. Its a big part of why I have Dish in my RV but cable at home right now.

I'd never believe just one but were they all wrong or is the Dish policy different?