# DIRECTV to Offer More Than 40 HDTV Channels in Mid-2007



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

*DIRECTV to Offer More Than 40 HDTV Channels in Mid-2007*



> New York, NY (November 29, 2006) -- DIRECTV will offer more than 40 High-Definition TV channels by next summer, according to David Hill, the satcaster's entertainment president.
> 
> .....


Read the rest of the story at: *TVPredictions.com*


----------



## TheMoose (Jan 20, 2006)

They didn't mention which channels would be in HD, any ideas on that?


----------



## cookpr (Aug 24, 2006)

Any way to paste this article in the thread...my work server blocks TV Predictions...


----------



## TheMoose (Jan 20, 2006)

cookpr said:


> Any way to paste this article in the thread...my work server blocks TV Predictions...


Here ya go,

_Mod Edit: Deleted contents of article, and sent them via PM to cookpr. see note below_


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

cookpr said:


> Any way to paste this article in the thread...my work server blocks TV Predictions...


We try not to do that... because of "fair use" and copywrite.

Sorry guys... just have to protect the forum.


----------



## TheMoose (Jan 20, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> We try not to do that... because of "fair use" and copywrite.
> 
> Sorry guys... just have to protect the forum.


Sorry about that, but I did add the copyright at the bottom.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

TheMoose said:


> Sorry about that, but I did add the copyright at the bottom.


Yes you did..... and thank you for that.
It is just one of our users got into some hot water, somewhere else...

So we have just tried to adopt the "partial" article, with link to the source... style to avoid any issues.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

Nothing really new here. We know that DirecTV will have lots more HD capacity when the new satellites go live in 2007. I guess now we know that will happen sometime in "mid 2007".


----------



## juan ellitinez (Jan 31, 2003)

What happened to 150 channel promise?


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

juan ellitinez said:


> What happened to 150 channel promise?


Capacity for 150 channels...

There won't even be 150 HD channels in existance by the end of 2007


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

150 is the capability, but you still need content. 40 is the more likely "actual", which probably includes a number of PPV channels. There probably aren't more than 20-25 available HD channels right now.


----------



## profmrw (Oct 9, 2006)

They will probably include your LOCAL HD channels and PPV in the mix of this number... It is pretty sad they haven't increase National HD Channels. I know bandwidth is the issue, but the cable companies are leading in this area.


----------



## noneroy (Aug 21, 2006)

profmrw said:


> They will probably include your LOCAL HD channels and PPV in the mix of this number... It is pretty sad they haven't increase National HD Channels. I know bandwidth is the issue, but the cable companies are leading in this area.


Leading for now. I think cable is going to hit a much harder ceiling than D* when it comes to bandwidth issues. My local CO just added Espn2 and MTV HD, and they had to compress the heck out of a few channels to make it work. So D* isn't the only place dealing with HD Lite. Cable leads for now, but I don't think any cable CO will have room for 150 channels (if D* keeps it's promise).


----------



## letsjet (Jan 25, 2006)

Is there a plan not to charge extra for HD? It would seem HD should be the std. pretty soon, no?


----------



## O2BRich (Nov 8, 2006)

letsjet said:


> Is there a plan not to charge extra for HD? It would seem HD should be the std. pretty soon, no?


I totally agree with that. 
It blew me away that I have to pay extra for the HD version of channels I already pay for. :eek2:


----------



## islesfan (Oct 18, 2006)

bobnielsen said:


> 150 is the capability, but you still need content. 40 is the more likely "actual", which probably includes a number of PPV channels. There probably aren't more than 20-25 available HD channels right now.


Any chance that new HD capacity might be used to carry more NHL Center Ice (or NBA or MLB) in HD like they already do for football?


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

islesfan said:


> Any chance that new HD capacity might be used to carry more NHL Center Ice (or NBA or MLB) in HD like they already do for football?


Sure, it is possible.

But MLB, NHL, NBA, and all the others... would have to setup the "package" to include HD option in it. DirecTV only can "resell" what is there to sell.


----------



## ClubSteeler (Sep 27, 2005)

noneroy said:


> Leading for now. I think cable is going to hit a much harder ceiling than D* when it comes to bandwidth issues. My local CO just added Espn2 and MTV HD, and they had to compress the heck out of a few channels to make it work. So D* isn't the only place dealing with HD Lite. Cable leads for now, but I don't think any cable CO will have room for 150 channels (if D* keeps it's promise).


Cable could add 150 HD channels, but it would have to eliminate its entire analog tier. The analog tier takes up 2/3 of cable's bandwidth. Unfortunately, a MAJOR segment of cable subscribers (I think about 40% for my cable company) are only analog subscribers.

Should cable alienate all of these people? I don't think they will.

My cable has been superior in every way to DirecTV. But now, I am starting to see over compression just like on D*. Things are getting worse. They must be making room for new HD channels.

It's really unfortunate. You take these beautiful digital channels and compress the hell out of them.

I swear, in my room with the shortest coax run, my analog picture beats both D* and Digital Cable, hands down, no contest.

What good is "crystal clear" digital TV when so compressed?

DirecTV is putting up more sats. That's why in the long run, I think they will win the battle.

Cable can't do that.

Cable is going to switched digital, which could likely free up enough space for maybe 20 HD channels. So they'll be alright for a while, but after that, they'll either have to start removing analog channels which will anger many, or start over compressing HD channels into HD-Lite and that will upset......... ME!!!!


----------



## Guest (Nov 30, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> We try not to do that... because of "fair use" and copywrite.


Do you mean "copyright"?


----------



## ckelly5 (Apr 6, 2005)

My Hope is that they do the following:

everything national missing so far that cable has (FOOD, HGTV, INHD, MHD, Golf/ VS)
VOOM
All RSNs in HD on the national sats for HD sports packages

a few surprises (new FOXHD channels, bump up the quality, free to subs/ included in HD package cost)

I'd love to see them flip a switch one day and BOOM, 40 new channels show up overnight. That would be a killer statement, and make them the undisputed leader, literally, overnight.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

noneroy said:


> Leading for now. I think cable is going to hit a much harder ceiling than D* when it comes to bandwidth issues. My local CO just added Espn2 and MTV HD, and they had to compress the heck out of a few channels to make it work. So D* isn't the only place dealing with HD Lite. Cable leads for now, but I don't think any cable CO will have room for 150 channels (if D* keeps it's promise).


If cable moves to switched video vs. broadband video that would greatly help their bandwidth issues. Also just moving all channels off of analog to digital would also buy back a bunch of bandwidth. But until that happens I agree that once D10 and D11 go active D* will have them beat.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

rcoleman111 said:


> Do you mean "copyright"?


You say tomato... I say tomato... ohh.. umm..
Yes copyright


----------



## Radio Enginerd (Oct 5, 2006)

profmrw said:


> They will probably include your LOCAL HD channels and PPV in the mix of this number... It is pretty sad they haven't increase National HD Channels. I know bandwidth is the issue, but the cable companies are leading in this area.


There's probably another thread discussing this question but when are they planning to turn off DNS MPEG-2 HD channels and replace them with MPEG-4 equivalents?

Seems like they'd be able to pick up some serious bandwidth!

I have a feeling this is tied to the HR-20 getting all of its bugs worked out. I would also imagine that all households that have DNS would need to upgrade to an HR-20 so maybe its more conceivable to assume the new sats will be up before this can happen.


----------



## dtv757 (Jun 4, 2006)

> I swear, in my room with the shortest coax run, my analog picture beats both D* and Digital Cable, hands down, no contest.


yea i noticed that. i have 2 friend that have analog cable, and when they connected there analog cable to there (51-52 HD TV) the picture looked good, nothing too noticeable. nothing stunning like HD but it looked good no shadow effects no nothing** (please note that one has a a/c booster connected to the analog cable signal behing the tv)

but @ work we have the HR10-250 connected to a 42 inch HD tv (via HDMI, and the TiVO set to 1080i) and the picture on some SD channels looks bad. it seamed kinda there was a shadow. on ch 212 you can really notice it. when the football players are lined up and about to make a play it does not look right when you look at it up close. but from a distance it look better.

is this the digital compression i'm seeing???


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Radio Enginerd said:


> Seems like they'd be able to pick up some serious bandwidth!


The current "success" of MPEG4 versus MPEG2 is typically less than 30% savings. Still not quite enough to add another channel to each transponder.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

dtv757 said:


> is this the digital compression i'm seeing???


What you're seeing is less than the best because it is digital _and_ because it is compressed. Analog cable sends out the basic analog channels essentially as they are broadcast. Often you'll find that quality of digital cable channels isn't as good as the analog counterparts. This is clearly the case with my local Comcast who offers the locally casted channels in both analog and digital renditions.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

bobnielsen said:


> There probably aren't more than 20-25 available HD channels right now.


Dish currently offers 29 HD nationals (including HBO, SHO and Starz) and they don't even carry the West versions. If you look at the C-Band offerings, there are probably close to 40 available now if you count East and West feeds.


----------



## f_javierny (Nov 29, 2006)

May have already covered this, but any idea what channels will be offered?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

f_javierny said:


> May have already covered this, but any idea what channels will be offered?


Read the article referred to in the original post carefully.


----------



## noneroy (Aug 21, 2006)

harsh said:


> Dish currently offers 29 HD nationals (including HBO, SHO and Starz) and they don't even carry the West versions. If you look at the C-Band offerings, there are probably close to 40 available now if you count East and West feeds.


I've said this a million times and I'm sorry to say it for the millionth and 1 time, but Dish offers a lot of channels on paper but not a lot of things people would watch.

Animania HD?
Family Room HD?
Equator HD?
Kung Fu HD?
World Cinema HD?
Rush HD?
Gallery HD?
Treasure HD?



Seems like fluff. LIke when DirecTV tells you how many channels you get, but 20-30 of them are music channels. I'll take 12 national channels with good content veruses 30 channels that couldn't keep VOOM afloat. Though I will say dish has FoodNetwork HD and National GeoHD both of which would be cool.


----------



## Mixer (Sep 28, 2006)

I read it. It's (which channels is) not mentioned.



harsh said:


> Read the article referred to in the original post carefully.


----------



## lewah33 (Nov 2, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> Sure, it is possible.
> 
> But MLB, NHL, NBA, and all the others... would have to setup the "package" to include HD option in it. DirecTV only can "resell" what is there to sell.


Yo Earl: Can you ferret out any news regarding what/how many hd games will be available with MLB Extra Innings after the new satellites are up?


----------



## Bobman (Jan 3, 2006)

If you ask me DirecTV is just hyping this up to stop customers from going elsewhere for HD. I mean its almost 2007 with HDTV being available for many many years and they only have what 10 or so HD channels ? Very sad.

I keep hearing wait wait sometime someday in the future DirecTV will offer more HD channels than many and the new HD DVR will be able to do this and that but its all smoke and mirrors.


----------



## Dave_S (Jan 7, 2006)

Any idea if these are going to be mostly HD locals, or will they be National HD channels? Are there 40+ National HD's available?


----------



## Dbadone (Nov 9, 2006)

O2BRich said:


> I totally agree with that.
> It blew me away that I have to pay extra for the HD version of channels I already pay for. :eek2:


The "broadcast companies" charge d* more for the HD version of the channels. You are already paying for standard. It will be a long while before HD becomes the standard.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

noneroy said:


> I've said this a million times and I'm sorry to say it for the millionth and 1 time, but Dish offers a lot of channels on paper but not a lot of things people would watch.
> Animania HD?
> Family Room HD?
> Equator HD?
> ...


I can't guess what some of those are but I can say that I, or my family, would watch at least four of them. And don't forget what would probably be my favorite, Monsters!


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

noneroy said:


> Seems like fluff.


When I have a opportunity to view them, I surf Kung Fu, Gallery, Rush and Equator.

Don't knock it until you've tried it.

Animania and Ultra aren't my idea of a good time, but I'm not going to insist that they don't have a viewership.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Dbadone said:


> The "broadcast companies" charge d* more for the HD version of the channels. You are already paying for standard. It will be a long while before HD becomes the standard.


Is two years a long time? I would predict that within a couple of years, most new content will be HD.

Did you know that there are a handful of cable access stations that are producing HD content?


----------



## kaysersoze (Feb 28, 2006)

harsh said:


> When I have a opportunity to view them, I surf Kung Fu, Gallery, Rush and Equator.
> 
> Don't knock it until you've tried it.
> 
> Animania and Ultra aren't my idea of a good time, but I'm not going to insist that they don't have a viewership.


I think people "surf" these channels mainly because of they want to watch something in HD. Once there are more "real" HD channels I suspect these will lose their novelty appeal.


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

kaysersoze said:


> I think people "surf" these channels mainly because of they want to watch something in HD. Once there are more "real" HD channels I suspect these will lose their novelty appeal.


I would have to agree with that. When I got my first HDTV, the HR10-250s weren't out yet. Then came along this Voom thing, with loads of HD content (relative to what WAS available at that time).

I signed up and was blown away by the picture and everything. Allowed me to see the HDTV the way it was meant to be. Then a week goes by, two weeks, OK - picture and all is awesome, but the actual content really kind of stinks. It really wasn't long before I found I was never watching Voom anymore.

Wow factor wears off, and the content was certainly not enough to keep me interested. One of the reasons I laugh everytime I hear E* being touted for their wide margin in HD content.

Another poster mentioned that aside from the Voom channels, E* basically has two HD channels that D* does not - National Geographic HD and HGTV HD (I haven't researched this myself, so don't bash me if that's not the case ). I certainly hope that the first launch of new HD content on D* is National Geopgraphic HD (unless SciFi and/or FX are in HD by then). As for HGTV, I personally wouldn't watch whether it was SD, HD, or 3D.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

JLucPicard said:


> E* basically has two HD channels that D* does not - National Geographic HD and HGTV HD (I haven't researched this myself, so don't bash me if that's not the case ).


E* carries 3 additional non-Voom channels: National Geographic HD, Food Network HD and HGTV HD. The also carry NFL HD as part of the basic HD package.

I watch TV in an effort to step out of my normal life. This necessarily involves being exposed to programming that I wouldn't have otherwise sought. I don't get that so much on the movie or sports channels. I look forward to the day when DirecTV offers more HD content that is "off the beaten path".

It wouldn't hurt if that content came to me in all of its High Definition splendor.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

profmrw said:


> They will probably include your LOCAL HD channels and PPV in the mix of this number... It is pretty sad they haven't increase National HD Channels. I know bandwidth is the issue, but the cable companies are leading in this area.


I think that you may want to read up on the many, many D* press releases, and the many, many posts here and elsewhere - obviously this post is based on NO fact. If HD locals were included in that number, then the number TODAY would be closing in on 200+ already (50+ markets, each with 2-4 HD lils, + Local HD RSN in 18 markets + the dozen or so HD nationals ALREADY on).

The 40 or so channels mentioned are DEFINITELY HD nationals - and it is exactly a band width problem (at THIS moment that is). The mid-2007 date CLEARLY represents the time AFTER DIRECTV10 is launched AND OPERATIONAL, this is the first of 2 birds that have been STATED CLEARLY FOR OVER A YEAR is going up and will be used for HD nationals. BTW, when you say cable companiew are leading, that may (or may not) be true in YOUR SPECIFIC area, but it is NOT ANYWHERE near true in most places.

It is indeed sad that there has not been too many HD nats added on DirecTV this past year, I agree, but realistically, there are only a handful not on that have any real viewership - let's not get TOO dramatic. I think life without HGTV-HD, FOOD-HD, MTV-HD is not too bad really. Within 6 months all of those and quite a few more will be in YOUR living room.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

Bobman said:


> If you ask me DirecTV is just hyping this up to stop customers from going elsewhere for HD. I mean its almost 2007 with HDTV being available for many many years and they only have what 10 or so HD channels ? Very sad.
> 
> I keep hearing wait wait sometime someday in the future DirecTV will offer more HD channels than many and the new HD DVR will be able to do this and that but its all smoke and mirrors.


I think you need to read above. About 1 1/2 years ago, DirecTv announced their plans for HD, at the same time acknowledging PUBLICLY that they were strapped for bandwidth and couldn't significantly add HD channels until the new sats were up.

2006 saw 75% of the U.S. get HD lils available (ahead of their target). DIRECTV9S launched last month (for backup and ALSO for uplink Ka capability). 2 more sats are launching (DIRECTV10 in the 1st Q of 07). Frankly, if you take the time to read what they said they would do- they have done just what they said they would, and in the timeframe they said it was coming.

As far as the HD DVR, it might have been slightly delayed (maybe a month), but I have 2 of them, they work fine, and perhaps the only downside is they don't have the OTA enabled yet, but even with that, they have CLEARLY come a long way in the past 15 months. They have added FAR MORE HD capacity than Dish - WITHOUT ANY DOUBT.


----------



## kathymoore (Mar 3, 2006)

harsh said:


> E* carries 3 additional non-Voom channels: National Geographic HD, Food Network HD and HGTV HD. .


DirecTv doesn't carry NGC HD and FoodNetwork HD.... neither do my local cable
company and FIOS TV carrier.... 

Is there anything good on the FoodNetwork HD?


----------



## jayco59 (Nov 21, 2004)

2 new satellites..does that equal a new dish setup? This week I'm upgrading to the 5 satellite system so I can get local HD will I need a 7-satellite dish system in 6 months to get these additional HD stations?


----------



## Newshawk (Sep 3, 2004)

No, the two new satellites will go into the 99 and 103 slots occupied by Spaceways 1 & 2, so the Ka/Ku dishes will see them just as they see the Spaceways. You can have more than one satellite in a position, and many slots have multiple satellites providing various services.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

ScoBuck said:


> 2006 saw 75% of the U.S. get HD lils available (ahead of their target).


There is very little of what you stated as facts that is true. The information that you're "reading" is significantly outdated. To wit:

1. HD LIL penetration is predicted to reach less than 70% by year-end. The 75% figure was the plan before they cut back 13 DMAs. As of November 8th, the number was about 60% with 45 markets. They have 161 HD markets left to go and around 80 SD markets left.

2. Uplink capacity cannot be shared between satellites. There is much debate about the role of DirecTV 9S today.

3. DirecTV 10 isn't scheduled to launch until April 2007 and DirecTV 11 appears to have been moved up to June 2007 from July 2007. Back in the day, this was to have happened "by 2007". Suffice it to say that Summer 2007 is the best case scenario to have both birds aloft and handed over.

4. DirecTV has nowhere near the available capacity that Dish Network has currently and possibly going forward. Echostar 11 is scheduled to go up in March 2007 as the first of six satellites going up in the next three years [a couple of these were to be used for the satellite Internet joint venture between DirecTV and Echostar which seems to have gone down in flames].

5. The HD DVR doesn't work "fine" as of the FA software release. Not having OTA capability is chief among the "problems". The R15 has been difficult to live with for quite a while now. Most of the problems will fade with time. Some of the perceived problems like dual buffers may never have a satisfactory answer.

DirecTV has a lot on their plate. If everything comes to pass the way they hope, things should be a whole lot better in nine months to a year from now. To suggest otherwise is to ignore the Q3 financial reports and publicly available launch information.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Newshawk said:


> You can have more than one satellite in a position, and many slots have multiple satellites providing various services.


You can certainly stack up satellites, but there is a limited amount of bandwidth that you can occupy at each slot. For DBS, I believe that the bandwidth is 500MHz in the Ku band and 500Mhz in the Ka band.


----------



## UncD2000 (Oct 15, 2006)

Cinemax HD & Starz HD are two important channels that are missing from the D* lineup, but available on Dish as well as most major cable systems. I see no reason to pay D* for these two just to watch SD movies.


----------



## islesfan (Oct 18, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> Sure, it is possible.
> 
> But MLB, NHL, NBA, and all the others... would have to setup the "package" to include HD option in it. DirecTV only can "resell" what is there to sell.


They already advertise "some games in HD" and they show the occasional game on 95 in HD (great if you are a Rangers or Blue Jackets fan), and they seem to show the Lakers on 95 regularly too.


----------



## noneroy (Aug 21, 2006)

kathymoore said:


> Is there anything good on the FoodNetwork HD?


I believe Good Eats is in HD. (Which is my fav show on that network).

I'm not sure who said it, but D* carries the games on NFL Network in HD. The rest of the content can be in HD but who cares. The NFL network is 1 game a week, with about an hour of news a day. The rest are retro games (not in HD) and pure conjecture as to how Tom Brady will win another superbowl (because everyone loves New England, right?  ).

DirecTV has a different path than E*. They decided they wanted to provide locals in HD rather than nationals for the time being. This seems to be a smart decision as most people watch prime time network TV shows. National HD channels will come along when they can.

Again, if the voom channels are so darn good, Voom would still be around. But they weren't. I'll give DirecTV the benefit of the doubt for now. However, if we are in the same boat a year from now, then I'll reconsider things.


----------



## Blademan (Jun 3, 2004)

noneroy said:


> I believe Good Eats is in HD. (Which is my fav show on that network).


Alton rocks!


----------



## luckydob (Oct 2, 2006)

Don't forget with the D* HD Package you get both channel 70 and 509. SAME STATION. Why? Doesn't this seem like a waste of bandwidth to you?

Note - This is HBO, so you would have to be a HBO subscriber to get the HD channels as well.


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

luckydob said:


> Don't forget with the D* HD Package you get both channel 70 and 509. SAME STATION. Why? Doesn't this seem like a waste of bandwidth to you?
> 
> Note - This is HBO, so you would have to be a HBO subscriber to get the HD channels as well.


Both channels on the receiver are mapped to the same transponder channel, so there is no increased use of bandwidth. It's just a convenience thing.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

UncD2000 said:


> Cinemax HD & Starz HD are two important channels that are missing from the D* lineup, but available on Dish as well as most major cable systems.


According to the information on ekb.dbstalk.com, Cinemax HD is not available from Dish Network. As I recall, they don't carry the West feeds of HBO HD and SHO HD on the main satellites.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

harsh said:


> There is very little of what you stated as facts that is true. The information that you're "reading" is significantly outdated. To wit:
> 
> 1. HD LIL penetration is predicted to reach less than 70% by year-end. The 75% figure was the plan before they cut back 13 DMAs. As of November 8th, the number was about 60% with 45 markets. They have 161 HD markets left to go and around 80 SD markets left.
> 
> ...


First, you should re-read the title of thread and OP. It CLEARLY says 40 HD channels by MID'07, and the OP STATES by SUMMER '07.

Of course, not much of what you said was current either (as of your post on 12/4), as the number of HD-lil markets was 49 and over 65% of US households. 8 more scheduled before end of year. Oh, and if the number is 70. 71, 75% by year end, IMO lighting the 50+ largest markets is indeed a great accomplishment.

DIRECTV10 may have been moved back from the first quarter (by 6 days), and as usual, the delay has NOTHING to do with DIRECTV. But geez, 6 days AFTER the first quarter - sorry. I'm not thinking that will really push back the schedule that much. And by mid-'07 they will have ENOUGH HD nat'l capacity for every significant HD channel (even without DIRECTV11 being launched).

No one disputes that TODAY DISH has a larger HD nat'l lineup. BTW, I hadn't noticed that this was a D* vs E* thread.

As for ECHOSTAR 11 (as of September of this year), it is only a backup sat.
http://www.skyrocket.de/space/index_frame.htm?http://www.skyrocket.de/space/doc_sdat/echostar-11.htm

I see NO scheduled additional ECHOSTAR launches scheduled for the rest of 2007:
http://www.lyngsat.com/launches/2007.html

I have 2 HR20's and have had relatively no problem with either. And wouldn't you know it, OTA is now being enabled as we speak. Another of your chief problems GONE.

I have also listened to the D* webinars and read their financial reports, they are making a TON of money - WAY AHEAD of last year. You will lose that debate also.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

Something else that is of some interest to me is the current listed destination orbit of DIRECTV9S. lyngsat is showing it will be parked at 109.0 west. This info was updated by them on 12/4.
http://www.lyngsat.com/tracker/dtv9s.html

By chance that is right along DIRECTV5 (at 109.8 west) which happens to be the bird currently used for a good portion of the HD nat'ls.
http://www.lyngsat.com/packages/directvusa110.html

Since 9S is similar to 7S (but with the ADDITION of 2 Ka-band transponders)it looks like they are adding SIGNIFICANT capacity at the 110 spot. What do you all think? 
DIRECTV7S carries BOTH locals (about 450 SD local stations) as well as 9HD natl's. and 36 sd nat'ls (para todos) and ALSO 20 conus music channels. This is obviously a much more capable and robust bird than DIRECTV5 (which is only used to send down 8 Hd natl's)
http://www.lyngsat.com/packages/directvusa119.html

*INFO ON DIRECTV9S*
The satellite, a version of SS/L's 1300 satellite platform designed for DirecTV's
payload requirements is similar to DirecTV7S - launched in May 2004 - with the
addition of two Ka-band transponders, the companies said.

Weighing approximately 5,530 kg at liftoff, DirecTV9S will be positioned at 101
degrees West longitude and is fitted with 52 high-power Ku-band transponders and 2 Ka-band transponders. With a design life of 15 years, the satellite will provide direct broadcasts for high-quality local and national digital video service using advanced digital compression technology


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

There are only 3 transponder frequencies (28, 30 and 32) licensed to Directv at the 110 degree spot; the others are licensed to Dish Network, so there is no opportunity for Directv to add channels at that location unless they went to spotbeams.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Newshawk said:


> No, the two new satellites will go into the 99 and 103 slots occupied by Spaceways 1 & 2, so the Ka/Ku dishes will see them just as they see the Spaceways. You can have more than one satellite in a position, and many slots have multiple satellites providing various services.


Then it sounds like these will definitely be MPEG-4 HD channels, which automatically prevents the many HR10-250 owners from being able to view these. Considering there are many more HR10-250 owners than there are HR20-700 owners, one would think DirecTV would want to at least make these viewable to the HR10-250 folks, perhaps even to both simultaneously.


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

The license for those locations are for Ka-band, not Ku-band and the HR10 won't receive Ka-band signals, regardless of whether they are MPEG2 or MPEG4 (and that can't be changed by a software update, either).


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

That's no surprise. Leave it up to DirecTV to piss of hundreds of thousands of HR10-250 customers to satisfy the few thousand HR20-700 customers. I'm not knocking the latter model, but D* has got to learn how to keep its customers happy.


----------



## Halo (Jan 13, 2006)

> You can certainly stack up satellites, but there is a limited amount of bandwidth that you can occupy at each slot. For DBS, I believe that the bandwidth is 500MHz in the Ku band and 500Mhz in the Ka band.


ku band has a single 500Mhz downlink (11.7-12.2 Ghz) but ka band has two 500Mhz downlinks (18.3-18.8Ghz) and (19.7-20.2 Ghz). The two ka bands aren't always liscensed together, like with Echostar IX at 121- they only got one 500Mhz downlink band at that slot.

Directv was licensed both 500Mhz bands for each of the 99.2 and 102.8 degree slots.
2 Ghz of liscensed spectrum is four times the total KU bandwidth they have at 101.
Then factor in the DVB-S2 gains (better FEC and better 8psk modulation) and then add in the gains from mpeg-4 AVC. That's a pretty huge expansion of capacity.


----------



## Halo (Jan 13, 2006)

Lord Vader said:


> That's no surprise. Leave it up to DirecTV to piss of hundreds of thousands of HR10-250 customers to satisfy the few thousand HR20-700 customers. I'm not knocking the latter model, but D* has got to learn how to keep its customers happy.


 That makes no sense. Should they have magically included a DVB-s2 demod chip and a MPEG-4 decoder in the HR10, technology that was not available at the time the HR10 was designed? Or should they _not use_ the technology available to them now which makes all these new HD channels possible because legacy receivers won't be able to receive the new channels.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

Lord Vader said:


> That's no surprise. Leave it up to DirecTV to piss of hundreds of thousands of HR10-250 customers to satisfy the few thousand HR20-700 customers. I'm not knocking the latter model, but D* has got to learn how to keep its customers happy.


The eventual migration of ALL HD to MPEG4 is NOT BY ANY MEANS NEW information. Why the shock?


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

Lord Vader said:


> Then it sounds like these will definitely be MPEG-4 HD channels, which automatically prevents the many HR10-250 owners from being able to view these. Considering there are many more HR10-250 owners than there are HR20-700 owners, one would think DirecTV would want to at least make these viewable to the HR10-250 folks, perhaps even to both simultaneously.


Again - the FACT that ALL of this HD programming will be in MPEG4 is news that is at least 2 years old already. DirecTV has been saying this long enough to give their customers time to plan for it.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Lord Vader said:


> That's no surprise. Leave it up to DirecTV to piss of hundreds of thousands of HR10-250 customers to satisfy the few thousand HR20-700 customers. I'm not knocking the latter model, but D* has got to learn how to keep its customers happy.


That's why D*'s been basically giving a HR20 to HR10-250 owners for free, or a small shipping charge.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

ScoBuck said:


> First, you should re-read the title of thread and OP. It CLEARLY says 40 HD channels by MID'07, and the OP STATES by SUMMER '07.


I'll note that "by mid '07" is actually later than "by Summer". Summer '07 arrives on June 21, 2007 while mid '07 arrives on July 1, 2007. Note that this assumes that Congress doesn't change that like they changed Daylight Savings Time for 2007. If you combine the stated intention not to offer content through either DirecTV 10 or DirecTV 11 until _both_ are ready, then it won't happen "by" either date.


> Of course, not much of what you said was current either (as of your post on 12/4), as the number of HD-lil markets was 49 and over 65% of US households.


My point was that as of the Q3 conference call, the number was 45.


> 8 more scheduled before end of year. Oh, and if the number is 70. 71, 75% by year end, IMO lighting the 50+ largest markets is indeed a great accomplishment.


Eight more scheduled and only three weeks left. I would also take issue with "50+ largest" with markets such as Portland, ME (#74), Madison, WI (85) and Reno, NV (#110).


> DIRECTV10 may have been moved back from the first quarter (by 6 days), and as usual, the delay has NOTHING to do with DIRECTV. But geez, 6 days AFTER the first quarter - sorry. I'm not thinking that will really push back the schedule that much. And by mid-'07 they will have ENOUGH HD nat'l capacity for every significant HD channel (even without DIRECTV11 being launched).


DirecTV knows about these delays and it doesn't seem to have had a significant impact on their promises. Perhaps they have adjusted their "coming on line in together" plan. I point out again that Spaceway F1 took 5-1/2 months to handoff and Spaceway F2 took five months to handoff. I still haven't seen an actual launch date: a unique day on or after which the satellite goes into orbit.


> No one disputes that TODAY DISH has a larger HD nat'l lineup. BTW, I hadn't noticed that this was a D* vs E* thread.


I had envisioned this tangent of the thread as a D* vs D*; the promises versus the delivery.


> I have 2 HR20's and have had relatively no problem with either. And wouldn't you know it, OTA is now being enabled as we speak. Another of your chief problems GONE.


No problem relative to what other receiver? With respect to some other people's HR20s or the R15? Looking at the map, the problem is fading very slowly as opposed to "gone". Hopefully the weak tuner 1 issue is very isolated.


> I have also listened to the D* webinars and read their financial reports, they are making a TON of money - WAY AHEAD of last year. You will lose that debate also.


They are making money, but relative to their "smaller" competitor, they are making WAY LESS.


----------



## Fl_Gulfer (Apr 28, 2005)

How are they going to get 40 when there are only.
Discovery HD Theater
ESPN HD
ESPN2 HD
Food Network HD
HBO HDTV
HDNet
HDNet Movies
HGTV HD
INHD/INHD2
MHD The Movie Channel HD
National Geographic HD
NBA HD
NFL HD
OLN HD
Showtime HDTV
Starz HD
TNT-HD
Universal HD
Wealth TV


----------



## bidger (Nov 19, 2005)

I think InHD2 has been dropped, but you've got A&E-HD to take it's place.

You might have RSNs in HD that figure into it. I really wish I didn't have to be in one of the select areas to get SNY-HD.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Halo said:


> That makes no sense. Should they have magically included a DVB-s2 demod chip and a MPEG-4 decoder in the HR10, technology that was not available at the time the HR10 was designed? Or should they _not use_ the technology available to them now which makes all these new HD channels possible because legacy receivers won't be able to receive the new channels.


No, what they should have done, and could do, is broadcast these 40 channels from a bird that can beam it to the HR10s as well. They DO or WILL have the ability to do this, even if it's for a limited time.


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

Lord Vader said:


> No, what they should have done, and could do, is broadcast these 40 channels from a bird that can beam it to the HR10s as well. They DO or WILL have the ability to do this, even if it's for a limited time.


Directv has already maxed out the use of the available Ku-band frequencies and orbital locations (at least for CONUS beams). Therefore, they didn't have authority to put up any more satellites in locations authorized for Ku-band (this involves international agreements as well as the FCC). There were Ka-band slots available (although not intended for DBS) and they were able to get the FCC to authorize their use for this purpose.

I think that they can only fit 2 or 3 MPEG2 HD channels in the bandwidth of a single Ku-band transponder (even with HD-Lite and reduced bit rates, the 3 transponders at 110 only carry 8 full-time channels), so 40 channels requires a lot of capacity. If the FCC would have authorized the Dish/Directv merger a few years back, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion.


----------



## Halo (Jan 13, 2006)

Lord Vader said:


> No, what they should have done, and could do, is broadcast these 40 channels from a bird that can beam it to the HR10s as well. They DO or WILL have the ability to do this, even if it's for a limited time.


Which bird is that? They can't even find the bandwidth to add _one_ new HD channel on their existing Ku spectrum, how in the world could they add 40?

Their Ku liscensed freqs are maxed out. They have to go to extreme measures now (downrezzing 1080i to 1280x1080 and often bitstarving) just to fit the HD channels they already offer. If they could add more HD channels on Ku they would, but they can't.


----------



## PoitNarf (Aug 19, 2006)

Lord Vader said:


> No, what they should have done, and could do, is broadcast these 40 channels from a bird that can beam it to the HR10s as well. They DO or WILL have the ability to do this, even if it's for a limited time.


I am by no means an expert on this stuff, but from what I've read your statement doesn't seem to hold much water. The new major birds going up are Ka only as far as I know. Every Sunday they need to kill all PPV, Interactive, and one MPEG2 HD channel just to scrounge up enough bandwidth for Sunday Ticket. Where is this mythical 40 MPEG2 HD capacity satellite you speak of?


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

harsh said:


> I'll note that "by mid '07" is actually later than "by Summer". Summer '07 arrives on June 21, 2007 while mid '07 arrives on July 1, 2007.


Please read the OP (written to provide a link to an article CLEARLY STATING SUMMER 07). That is what the topic here is.
Not sure why it's ok for YOU to start by telling me my stuff is outdated, and then have an 'excuse for why yours is Ok to be outdated. At the time you replied to my post (12/4), YOUR INFO WAS ALSO OUTDATED. FACT#1



harsh said:


> If you combine the stated intention not to offer content through either DirecTV 10 or DirecTV 11 until _both_ are ready, then it won't happen "by" either date.


I have NEVER heard this before, please post a reputable link that said they will NOT be operating DIRECTV10 until 11 is ALSO up and on.



harsh said:


> My point was that as of the Q3 conference call, the number was 45.Eight more scheduled and only three weeks left. I would also take issue with "50+ largest" with markets such as Portland, ME (#74), Madison, WI (85) and Reno, NV (#110).


If this was your time-frame, you NEED to state it, how the hell would anyone know that? BTW, TODAY 45 out of the top 50 ALREADY lit, the other 5 are still scheduled for this year - you're wrong again on a couple of points. One being that 49 are lit and 8 more (at least) are scheduled for this year.



harsh said:


> No problem relative to what other receiver?).


Again, some report problems, not EVERYONE. Mine (HR20's)are working fine, I said I had a couple of minor issues, but IMO they work fine.



harsh said:


> They are making money, but relative to their "smaller" competitor, they are making WAY LESS.


3Q (which is your time frame correct?). Well you're wrong again on this one (no Surprise). DirecTV has revenues of 3.67 Billion vs 2.4 Billion for DISH; DirecTV had Net income of 370 million (increase from 95 million a year ago) - DISH had net income of 140 million (*DOWN FROM 209 million a year ago*

Still thinking you seem to want to nitpick my original point. I said 75%-it will end at 70%+ Hd LILS.

If you dispute the financials, post the documents that prove they are false. if you dispute the 45 out of top 50 DMA's post the mistake. If you find documents that say no usage of DIRECTV10 until DIRECTV1 is up , post it.

Until then, TA TA


----------



## rorkin (Dec 9, 2006)

Since I can get the OTA locals in my area and find that to be just fine, I would not 
like to switch to a 5 lnb dish.. I do have an H20 receiver so the MPEG-4 is not an issue.. Any chance any of the additional HD channels will be added is such a way that 
I can use my existing Dish ??


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

rorkin said:


> Since I can get the OTA locals in my area and find that to be just fine, I would not
> like to switch to a 5 lnb dish.. I do have an H20 receiver so the MPEG-4 is not an issue.. Any chance any of the additional HD channels will be added is such a way that
> I can use my existing Dish ??


Even if they could add a couple more right now, the plan is for the HD birds to be at 99 and 103 - so yes, you will need a 5lnb dish pretty soon


----------



## PoitNarf (Aug 19, 2006)

rorkin said:


> Since I can get the OTA locals in my area and find that to be just fine, I would not
> like to switch to a 5 lnb dish.. I do have an H20 receiver so the MPEG-4 is not an issue.. Any chance any of the additional HD channels will be added is such a way that
> I can use my existing Dish ??


0% chance. If you want to get any of the new HD channels that will be added next year you'll need a 5LNB dish.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

ScoBuck said:


> Please read the OP (written to provide a link to an article CLEARLY STATING SUMMER 07). That is what the topic here is.


The quote was (and it had little to do with OP who was Earl):


David Hill said:


> DIRECTV will offer more than 40 High-Definition TV channels by next summer, according to David Hill, the satcaster's entertainment president.


The key word being "by". This is as opposed to "during" or "after". I am claiming, based on the previous two satellites, that hand-off of the first satellite handed off won't happen until August 2007 at the earliest. Note that for calculation purposes I'm assuming that the satellites will launch during the currently projected date ranges (some time in April and some time in June). I see these numbers as being "best case scenario". Any slip in launch dates will push my projections out accordingly.


> I have NEVER heard this before, please post a reputable link that said they will NOT be operating DIRECTV10 until 11 is ALSO up and on.


I cannot find a link, nor can I remember who said it.


> If this was your time-frame, you NEED to state it, how the hell would anyone know that? BTW, TODAY 45 out of the top 50 ALREADY lit, the other 5 are still scheduled for this year ...


Three weeks=end of 2006. Apparently you ignored my point about there being several markets below 50 (seven to be exact). Thus, they are currently missing eight markets and will still be missing at least three if they don't exceed their targets (there would be 10 markets smaller than the 50 largest and 47 of the 50 largest). At this point, they're going to have to scramble to meet their projection.


> 3Q (which is your time frame correct?). Well you're wrong again on this one (no Surprise). DirecTV has revenues of 3.67 Billion vs 2.4 Billion for DISH; DirecTV had Net income of 370 million (increase from 95 million a year ago) - DISH had net income of 140 million (*DOWN FROM 209 million a year ago*.


These figures include some non-GAAP accounting and a substantial conversion to leased receivers which allows them to be declared as assets.


> Still thinking you seem to want to nitpick my original point. I said 75%-it will end at 70%+ Hd LILS.


The 65% number I've been throwing around was from June and it was to represent the 50 markets that they had named at that time. At the conference call, the penetration at that time was said to be about 60%. After the addition of the four subsequent markets, the may have elevated that number to 62% (if you round up; market #39 is about 2/3%). Adding another 7-10 markets isn't likely to push that number up 7% or more considering that when you get down below #36, you're talking less than 3/4% per market.


> If you dispute the financials, post the documents that prove they are false.


I don't dispute the financials, just your interpretation of them. That's where finance departs from bookkeeping. DirecTV has done some serious maneuvering to make the books look good.


> if you dispute the 45 out of top 50 DMA's post the mistake.


If you're talking today, there are 42 of the top 50. Out of the 49 existing DMAs, the following are ranked lower than 50 (taken from Newshawk's list -- http://www.dbstalk.com/hr20/html/DTV_HDLIL_DMA.html :
Providence, RI (#51)
Austin, TX (#52)
Fresno, CA (#55)
Green Bay, WI (#69)
Portland, ME (#74)
Madison, WI (#84)
Reno, NV (#110)

As I said earlier, three of the eight projected DMAs are also ranked below 50.


New Orleans, LA (#54)
Tulsa, OK (#66)
Spokane, WA (#78)



> If you find documents that say no usage of DIRECTV10 until DIRECTV1 is up , post it.


I'll keep working on that one.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

harsh said:


> The quote was (and it had little to do with OP who was Earl):The key word being "by". This is as opposed to "during" or "after". I am claiming, based on the previous two satellites, that hand-off of the first satellite handed off won't happen until August 2007 at the earliest. Note that for calculation purposes I'm assuming that the satellites will launch during the currently projected date ranges (some time in April and some time in June). I see these numbers as being "best case scenario". Any slip in launch dates will push my projections out accordingly.I cannot find a link, nor can I remember who said it.Three weeks=end of 2006. Apparently you ignored my point about there being several markets below 50 (seven to be exact). Thus, they are currently missing eight markets and will still be missing at least three if they don't exceed their targets (there would be 10 markets smaller than the 50 largest and 47 of the 50 largest). At this point, they're going to have to scramble to meet their projection.These figures include some non-GAAP accounting and a substantial conversion to leased receivers which allows them to be declared as assets.The 65% number I've been throwing around was from June and it was to represent the 50 markets that they had named at that time. At the conference call, the penetration at that time was said to be about 60%. After the addition of the four subsequent markets, the may have elevated that number to 62% (if you round up; market #39 is about 2/3%). Adding another 7-10 markets isn't likely to push that number up 7% or more considering that when you get down below #36, you're talking less than 3/4% per market.I don't dispute the financials, just your interpretation of them. That's where finance departs from bookkeeping. DirecTV has done some serious maneuvering to make the books look good.If you're talking today, there are 42 of the top 50. Out of the 49 existing DMAs, the following are ranked lower than 50 (taken from Newshawk's list -- http://www.dbstalk.com/hr20/html/DTV_HDLIL_DMA.html :
> Providence, RI (#51)
> Austin, TX (#52)
> Fresno, CA (#55)
> ...


Seems to me that the largest part of your claim (in regards to the OP) regarding having 40 HD nat'ls by summer '07, is based on them not using DIRECTV 10 untul DIRECTV11 is operational - and you don't remember where you heard that and don't have any postable proof. geez


----------



## uncrules (Dec 20, 2005)

harsh said:


> The key word being "by". This is as opposed to "during" or "after". I am claiming, based on the previous two satellites, that hand-off of the first satellite handed off won't happen until August 2007 at the earliest. Note that for calculation purposes I'm assuming that the satellites will launch during the currently projected date ranges (some time in April and some time in June). I see these numbers as being "best case scenario". Any slip in launch dates will push my projections out accordingly.


Wasn't the long delay in hand off with the Spaceways due to something in the contract between D* and Boeing that required longer than normal testing? I thought I remember reading that. If I'm remembering that correctly, maybe D10 and D11 won't take as long to be handed over to D*. How long did satellites other than the Spaceways take?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

ScoBuck said:


> Seems to me that the largest part of your claim (in regards to the OP) regarding having 40 HD nat'ls by summer '07, is based on them not using DIRECTV 10 untul DIRECTV11 is operational - and you don't remember where you heard that and don't have any postable proof. geez


The largest part of the claim is that if they don't launch one of the satellites before April, it won't be ready by the end of June. June 30 - five months = February 28. I've given them (Boeing and/or DirecTV) the benefit of the doubt by reducing the best case handoff time to four months. A simultaneous turn-on would be incidental and would likely delay the turn-up further.

Perhaps you could provide a rosier scenario?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

uncrules said:


> Wasn't the long delay in hand off with the Spaceways due to something in the contract between D* and Boeing that required longer than normal testing? I thought I remember reading that. If I'm remembering that correctly, maybe D10 and D11 won't take as long to be handed over to D*. How long did satellites other than the Spaceways take?


I recall many such suppositions, but nothing authoritative. I'm of a mind that because of the pointable spotbeams, it takes longer to get them all arranged and tested. Previous satellites were considerably less complex than the Spaceways.

A possible complication in my theory would be that the DirecTV satellites were designed from scratch for DBS and both the Spaceways were refitted from their original data communications task.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

If I remember, SW1 had some issues due to something happening at Boeing that really caused a big problem shortly after launch, I think it was LonghornXP that mentioned this but couldn't go into details. On SW2 I seem to remember that Hughes was supposed to have access to it for a few months in order to do some testing of actual internet/data capabilites to get ready for their launch of SW3.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

harsh said:


> The largest part of the claim is that if they don't launch one of the satellites before April, it won't be ready by the end of June. June 30 - five months = February 28. I've given them (Boeing and/or DirecTV) the benefit of the doubt by reducing the best case handoff time to four months. A simultaneous turn-on would be incidental and would likely delay the turn-up further.
> 
> Perhaps you could provide a rosier scenario?


well OBVIOUSLY if there is a delay in launch it will put back the schedule - DUH. However, ALL of that is OUT of DirecTV's hands isn't it?

Also, in all honesty, from my perspective all of this pigeon-holing of having to meet specific dates or they have 'done something wrong' doesn't fly with me (sic). As we see with shuttle launches, software launches, etc. - companies put out good faith info as to expected rollouts. My concern is that they have taken the steps and have made the investments to reach the next level. If it is July 1st, or August 17th my world is not going to change much, and I will get by without ANY problem. Yeah, I wish it was here today, but it's only TV.

BTW, ECHOSTAR XI is a backup sat. ECHOSTAR XII doesn't launch until '08. I am convinced that by summer -07 (give or take a month), DirecTV will clearly have a far greater HD capacity than E*.


----------



## HDSeeker (Dec 22, 2006)

ClubSteeler said:


> Cable could add 150 HD channels, but it would have to eliminate its entire analog tier. The analog tier takes up 2/3 of cable's bandwidth. Unfortunately, a MAJOR segment of cable subscribers (I think about 40% for my cable company) are only analog subscribers.
> 
> Should cable alienate all of these people? I don't think they will.
> 
> ...


I'm just not seeing the problem you are talking about.
My DirecTV HD is far Superior to any 480i anolog signal on the planet.
What makes you think your getting overcompressed?
You either get 1080i or you don't
If you are getting pixalation, maybe it a local issue.
I just don't see it as being an issue at this time.


----------



## Milominderbinder2 (Oct 8, 2006)

Fl_Gulfer said:


> How are they going to get 40 when there are only.
> Discovery HD Theater
> ESPN HD
> ESPN2 HD
> ...


This is in another thread. Click here: _100+ HD Channels_.

Lyngsat shows that Directv 11 launch is still on on April 6th and the Directv 10 is moved back to September now.

- Craig


----------



## davidrumm (Dec 2, 2005)

Milominderbinder2 said:


> Lyngsat shows that Directv 11 launch is still on on April 6th and the Directv 10 is moved back to September now.
> 
> - Craig


Actually I think they are stating will be in the 2nd quarter. April to June of 07. I'm not sure about that though.

David


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Milominderbinder2 said:


> Lyngsat shows that Directv 11 launch is still on on April 6th and the Directv 10 is moved back to September now.


The Lyngsat information is dated September 2006. Satellite Finance says that the dates are April or May for DirecTV 10 and June for DirecTV 11 as of some time in November. My recollection is that DirecTV 10 has been delayed a month and DirecTV 11 had been moved up a month to June.


----------



## westernamerican (Dec 14, 2006)

What is the cost to consumer gonna be (estimate)?


----------



## Ryanm86 (Oct 18, 2006)

RAD said:


> If cable moves to switched video vs. broadband video that would greatly help their bandwidth issues. Also just moving all channels off of analog to digital would also buy back a bunch of bandwidth. But until that happens I agree that once D10 and D11 go active D* will have them beat.


I hear that is the way Time Warner is going


----------

