# Any way to get different locals



## Swampfox (Jan 3, 2009)

I live about 2 miles from the DMA line, as a result, I get locals from 85 miles away, instead of 15.

any way to get the true locals without telling them Ive moved and giving them a false address? Im worried as soon as I do that Ill need a service call :eek2:


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

Put up an OTA antenna?


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

Swampfox said:


> I live about 2 miles from the DMA line, as a result, I get locals from 85 miles away, instead of 15.
> 
> any way to get the true locals without telling them Ive moved and giving them a false address? Im worried as soon as I do that Ill need a service call :eek2:


Check out www.antennaweb.org to see what you could get over the air(OTA).


----------



## boba (May 23, 2003)

Jhon69 said:


> Check out www.antennaweb.org to see what you could get over the air(OTA).


Or check out www.tvfool.com at 15 miles from the broadcasters OTA should not be a problem. That must be a very small DMA that 15 miles away you are into another DMA.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

I suggest you get a Channel Master 2016 and mount it to a J-pole on the roof. That would more then cover you and its not a real big antenna either. It should plug right into the back of your reciever and you would be good to go.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

Swampfox said:


> I live about 2 miles from the DMA line, as a result, I get locals from 85 miles away, instead of 15.
> 
> any way to get the true locals without telling them Ive moved and giving them a false address? Im worried as soon as I do that Ill need a service call :eek2:


OTA is the only way. The lines have to be drawn somewhere. I would definitely not suggest falsifying your address.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

joshjr said:


> I suggest you get a Channel Master 2016 and mount it to a J-pole on the roof.


Doesn't it seem a bit premature to recommend a particular antenna without knowing the specifics of the OP's broadcast stations?

It is certainly presumptive to assume that the OP has an ATSC capable tuner in their satellite receiver.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

I agree with Harsh, 15 miles away sounds like it might need a yellow rated antenna


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

CCarncross said:


> OTA is the only way. The lines have to be drawn somewhere. I would definitely not suggest falsifying your address.


 +1 on that


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

harsh said:


> Doesn't it seem a bit premature to recommend a particular antenna without knowing the specifics of the OP's broadcast stations?
> 
> It is certainly presumptive to assume that the OP has an ATSC capable tuner in their satellite receiver.


Maybe but the only thing I would note that might be an issue is that the antenna I suggested does not cover VHF channels (2-6). As long as they dont need any of those then this is a perfect solution in my mind.

Do E* recievers not have the ATSC tuners in them? I thought their DVR's did.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

Im more confused after talking to E*. Some of their recievers have the ATSC tuners in them. Some dont but you can add on a module thats $29.99 but not on all of them. Some you need a converter box that will hook to some recievers but not all. All in all I guess harsh is correct. I would call them first if you dont really know what you have or would need to use OTA. Seems to be a big cluster. Without knowing exactly what you have I can not say go ahead and buy the antenna. You many need more hardware to support an antenna.


----------



## Swampfox (Jan 3, 2009)

I have a homemade OTA antenna that does a decent job, but you have to press the button 7 times between the TV and HDMI input lol

I cant see any way to connect the antenna to the dish receiver

Id just like to get them over the dish if possible, if not, Ill live with it

I emailed customer support so we will see what they say

If it is based on zip code, then my zip code extends into the other DMA, so Ill just tell them Im in the other county and hope they dont have a map handy


----------



## Swampfox (Jan 3, 2009)

All of my receivers are H23-600's BTW


----------



## hobie346 (Feb 23, 2007)

Swampfox said:


> All of my receivers are H23-600's BTW


Have you tried entering a different ZIP code for the secondary DMA?


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

Swampfox said:


> All of my receivers are H23-600's BTW


With the latest software update rolling out for the H23 HD Receivers, you can now use the AM21 Off-Air Tuner to provide local digital TV reception. It's $50 via your DirecTV.com account and connects to the H23 via USB.

What software version does your H23 have now?


----------



## Swampfox (Jan 3, 2009)

it says 0x4086 last updated 1/06/09

changing the zip didnt do anything


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Changing the zip will not do anything. Once you have version 42EB or higher on your H23, you can buy the AM21 module and go through its setup routine to choose which locals you want to receive.


----------



## smellyhash (Jul 14, 2008)

It just sucks i also only get 1 local in HD and thats ABC thank god. i REALLY think D* has to step up. My neighbor came over to grab me to point out that DISH Network has the locals in HD. Ever sense that lil incident the wifey is telling me 300 dollars to cancel in order to get those 5 channels in HD is well worth it to her:grin:. D* needs to CATCH UP with the times here. They claim to be the biggest and the best yet the "little guys" are kicking there ass in local HD reception. 

Sorry for the rant


----------



## jdspencer (Nov 8, 2003)

smellyhash said:


> It just sucks i also only get 1 local in HD and thats ABC thank god. i REALLY think D* has to step up. My neighbor came over to grab me to point out that DISH Network has the locals in HD. Ever sense that lil incident the wifey is telling me 300 dollars to cancel in order to get those 5 channels in HD is well worth it to her:grin:. D* needs to CATCH UP with the times here. They claim to be the biggest and the best yet the "little guys" are kicking there ass in local HD reception.
> 
> Sorry for the rant


At least you get one local channel from DirecTV. 
My area has yet to get any locals, either SD or HD.  
And Dish doesn't offer them either.


----------



## sooner02 (Feb 21, 2009)

Dish offers locals here, but I still got Direct anyway because of a referral and after the promos Direct ended up being cheaper. Plus with E* you have to go through All-American Direct to get locals if you have no particular network affiliate (costs extra, plus even more for HD). 

Plus with OTA, you don't have to pay Dish $5 for locals you can get for free. It would be nice if Direct did offer locals here, but even still they probably would not carry all the sub-channels that I still want. So even with Dish, I'd still want to have OTA.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

Im enjoying the DNS feeds but I can not get CBS to approve me so I was forced to use OTA. I just ordered a bigger antenna that should help more. I expect it to be here tomorrow. It will plug right into my HR20-100. I am hoping my signal strength gets better. I ordered a Channel Master 3016 and I am about 30 miles away from the towers. I get 2 stations from kansas and 3 from missouri. They are 30 degrees apart. There is no CW here so I get it nationally from D* as well.


----------



## dinotheo (Sep 22, 2006)

Swampfox said:


> I live about 2 miles from the DMA line, as a result, I get locals from 85 miles away, instead of 15.
> 
> any way to get the true locals without telling them Ive moved and giving them a false address? Im worried as soon as I do that Ill need a service call :eek2:


Even with OTA, you'd still have to add AM21's to all of the receivers you'd want to have the other locals. I'd just use a friend's address. It is quick and easy. If you still get paper bills you can have a mailing address and a service address. That way your bills will still come to your home. I am peeved about the DMA's myself. My local cable company offers locals for 2 markets (Baltimore and Wash DC) but DTV is only allowed to offer one. Seems a little unfair to DTV.


----------



## FaderMD (Jun 13, 2009)

Isn't changing your address (zip code or otherwise) to get locals from somewhere else a felony?? Hmm..


----------



## Mertzen (Dec 8, 2006)

FaderMD said:


> Isn't changing your address (zip code or otherwise) to get locals from somewhere else a felony?? Hmm..


I doubt it is a felony. but it is in violation of the user agreement.


----------



## FaderMD (Jun 13, 2009)

Mertzen said:


> I doubt it is a felon. but it is against the user agreement.


You're right, i don't think it's actually a felony..

If i remember correctly didn't the FCC make some kind of federal regulation against falsification of a service address? That falls under fraud, correct? It talks about that in the SHVIA, doesn't it?


----------



## sooner02 (Feb 21, 2009)

What's the penalty for falsifying your service address?


----------



## FaderMD (Jun 13, 2009)

Good Question, that's what i'm looking for on the FCC website. For sure you'd lose your service and have to pay cxl fees if you owed them at the very least. I thought i read something on the SHVA/SHVIA about how it's considered fraud as there have been ppl in the past who have had recievers active at 2 addresses at once on the same account. (yes that's a big no-no) It'd be the same thing as stealing cable from your neighbor. It falls into the same category if i remember right. I'll have to keep looking.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

sooner02 said:


> What's the penalty for falsifying your service address?


I'm pretty sure its fines for you and fines for your service provider...


----------



## dinotheo (Sep 22, 2006)

FaderMD said:


> Isn't changing your address (zip code or otherwise) to get locals from somewhere else a felony?? Hmm..


A felony? Seriously? You try to scare people with telling them it is a felony? Come on. Say that it isn't ethical, or something along those lines. But a felony?
Sheesh.


----------



## FaderMD (Jun 13, 2009)

dinotheo said:


> A felony? Seriously? You try to scare people with telling them it is a felony? Come on. Say that it isn't ethical, or something along those lines. But a felony?
> Sheesh.


Haha, seriously, i said it's _*not*_ a felony like 5 posts ago.. the FCC website covers it pretty well. And yeah, fines for you, and fines for the company i'm sure. Try stealing cable and see what happens.


----------



## FaderMD (Jun 13, 2009)

For clarification, i don't care what anyone does with their accounts. Do it and see what happens, then post here and let us know. I really don't care. I'm just trying to shed some light and help the OP avoid future frustration by taking shortcuts. I'm not gonna keep looking, but the SHVA/SHVIA on the FCC website goes over it.


----------



## dinotheo (Sep 22, 2006)

FaderMD said:


> Haha, seriously, i said it's not a felony like 5 posts ago..


Well, like, 2 posts before that, you haven't edited your post. And you didn't definitively say that it isn't a felony. You said that "i don't think it's actually a felony". The fact that you would even entertain the thought that this would be a felony seriously undermines your credibility.



FaderMD said:


> the FCC website covers it pretty well. And yeah, fines for you, and fines for the company i'm sure. Try stealing cable and see what happens.


No fines for me, I have OTA so not an issue for me.

Please explain to us, how is this like stealing cable? This is not even close. You are not stealing service from DTV. 
The only argument that could be made is that you could cause lower viewership numbers for your local (local according to DMA) station. In my example I am still not watching (for the most part) the locals provided to me by DTV. I am using my OTA antenna to watch locals that DTV is not allowed to provide me. (Though my local cable company carries both markets)


----------



## longrider (Apr 21, 2007)

Just a reminder,I have no authority here, but discussion of 'moving' is not allowed on this forum as it is a violation of DirecTV TOS


----------



## FaderMD (Jun 13, 2009)

FaderMD said:


> For clarification, i don't care what anyone does with their accounts. Do it and see what happens, then post here and let us know. I really don't care. I'm just trying to shed some light and help the OP avoid future frustration by taking shortcuts. I'm not gonna keep looking, but the SHVA/SHVIA on the FCC website goes over it.


When was i *EVER* talking about OTA???

I'm done, do it, don't do it, i don't care. If you're smart you'll research it before you do it. (or actually get smart and not do it) Read the SHVA. I'm done with this thread.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

dinotheo said:


> Well, like, 2 posts before that, you haven't edited your post. And you didn't definitively say that it isn't a felony. You said that "i don't think it's actually a felony". The fact that you would even entertain the thought that this would be a felony seriously undermines your credibility.
> 
> No fines for me, I have OTA so not an issue for me.
> 
> ...


It is like stealing cable because you're not watching locals that are assigned to you. That means that the local affiliates in that area are not being watched. This impacts their revenue from advertisement. It also has ramifications on things such as sports regulations. It is theft whether or not you want to argue about it or not.

There are heavy fines for this and just for having local channels isn't worth the risk. Sure you'll find other sites that have more information about how and that people never get caught but the people who do, which is a lot, don't often go posting about it either.

If you feel that much about local channels then get a service provider who meets your needs or get an OTA setup. Don't violate FCC laws and regulations because it's not worth it.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

Its really all a matter of what you feel okay with doing. I live in an area where D* dont offer my locals to. I chose to go waiver and OTA route. I wanted to stay within the D* guidelines and within the law. I had friends trying to talk me into FTA and look where it is now. I also know people in my town that use a false addy to get the locals. I just refused to do it. 

My thoughts were if I need another reciever added or have to have a tech come out I dont want to have to worry about me doing something that is wrong. Its easier to just stay with what you know is right. To each their own though. I dont judge anyone for doing otherwise I just know what I can live with.


----------



## dinotheo (Sep 22, 2006)

Shades228 said:


> It is like stealing cable because you're not watching locals that are assigned to you. That means that the local affiliates in that area are not being watched. This impacts their revenue from advertisement. It also has ramifications on things such as sports regulations. It is theft whether or not you want to argue about it or not.


Like I mentioned in my post, that is the only "stretch" argument that can be made. But please don't equate it to stealing cable. It is quite different. The stations in question can all be picked up by OTA.

From doing a little reading, how does the FCC's list of Significantly viewed stations affect me or the op? Looking through the list (From the FCC's website) my county has both Wash DC and Baltimore locals. On an FCC information sheet I found the following quote 
" In addition to stations in their DMA, satellite subscribers who receive local-into-local service may, under certain circumstances, receive individual stations from markets outside their DMA that are deemed "significantly viewed" in their community. It is up to the satellite carrier whether or not to offer significantly viewed stations and a subscriber must be subscribing to local-into-local service in his or her DMA to be eligible to receive significantly viewed stations. "

So what does this mean? The "under circumstances" line has me confused. Also does this mean that the FCC is ok with me getting both DC and Balt but that DTV just doesn't bother to offer them?


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

dinotheo said:


> Like I mentioned in my post, that is the only "stretch" argument that can be made. But please don't equate it to stealing cable. It is quite different. The stations in question can all be picked up by OTA.
> 
> From doing a little reading, how does the FCC's list of Significantly viewed stations affect me or the op? Looking through the list (From the FCC's website) my county has both Wash DC and Baltimore locals. On an FCC information sheet I found the following quote
> " In addition to stations in their DMA, satellite subscribers who receive local-into-local service may, under certain circumstances, receive individual stations from markets outside their DMA that are deemed "significantly viewed" in their community. It is up to the satellite carrier whether or not to offer significantly viewed stations and a subscriber must be subscribing to local-into-local service in his or her DMA to be eligible to receive significantly viewed stations. "
> ...


D* is not very good about giving Significantly viewed channels to its customers so dont hold your breath.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

dinotheo said:


> *It is up to the satellite carrier whether or not to offer significantly viewed stations *and a subscriber must be subscribing to local-into-local service in his or her DMA to be eligible to receive significantly viewed stations. "
> 
> So what does this mean? The "under circumstances" line has me confused. Also does this mean that the FCC is ok with me getting both DC and Balt but that DTV just doesn't bother to offer them?


D* talked about this a few years ago, but very few SV stations have been offered as of yet. I believe cable companies are lobbying hard AGAINST this as it would put sat on a much more level playing field as far as stations offered. Many cable companies offer more than one set of locals if there is another DMA close by, my area included, and they try to capitalize on it in their local ads as well. If this issue keeps coming up, you'd think D* would start to see that where possible offering the SV's would win them some customer service points..D* are you listening?


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

CCarncross said:


> D* talked about this a few years ago, but very few SV stations have been offered as of yet. I believe cable companies are lobbying hard AGAINST this as it would put sat on a much more level playing field as far as stations offered. Many cable companies offer more than one set of locals if there is another DMA close by, my area included, and they try to capitalize on it in their local ads as well. If this issue keeps coming up, you'd think D* would start to see that where possible offering the SV's would win them some customer service points..D* are you listening?


Wouldnt it be interesting if we could get SV channels in markets where D* did not offer locals?


----------



## dinotheo (Sep 22, 2006)

CCarncross said:


> D* talked about this a few years ago, but very few SV stations have been offered as of yet. I believe cable companies are lobbying hard AGAINST this as it would put sat on a much more level playing field as far as stations offered. Many cable companies offer more than one set of locals if there is another DMA close by, my area included, and they try to capitalize on it in their local ads as well. If this issue keeps coming up, you'd think D* would start to see that where possible offering the SV's would win them some customer service points..D* are you listening?


I would think that this would be simple to implement as well. The FCC has an information sheet which is very clear on what the SV's are based on county. Heck, I'd even pay an additional locals fee as well. Though I believe most folks wouldn't be ok with this. I could see, say, an additional $2-3 for a second set of locals.
It just makes sense. If I can pickup a station OTA with set top rabbit ears, you'd think that I should be able to get them from my sat provider. Actually even though I have OTA, I am without 2 DC locals at the moment since they moved to VHF. I am waiting on the darn backordered AntennaCraft Y5-7-13 antenna to finally get to me so that I can combine it with my bowtie.


----------



## Swampfox (Jan 3, 2009)

I didnt say I was going to falsify my address, I asked if there was a way to get them other than doing that.

The local cable company carries stations from both markets, except for NBC because the farther away NBC claimed exclusive rights in my area.

of course their local news does not cover this area at all.


----------



## BKC (Dec 12, 2007)

Shades228 said:


> It is like stealing cable because you're not watching locals that are assigned to you. That means that the local affiliates in that area are not being watched. This impacts their revenue from advertisement. It also has ramifications on things such as sports regulations. It is theft whether or not you want to argue about it or not.
> 
> There are heavy fines for this and just for having local channels isn't worth the risk. Sure you'll find other sites that have more information about how and that people never get caught but the people who do, which is a lot, don't often go posting about it either.
> 
> If you feel that much about local channels then get a service provider who meets your needs or get an OTA setup. Don't violate FCC laws and regulations because it's not worth it.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 28, 2005)

All this talk of fines and such, but I have yet to see anyone post a link to a legal citation clearly stating the individual penalties for a false service address. I've never heard of a single person ever being fined for it and I'm certain it would have been huge news here on the forum if it had happened.

The penalties are on the provider's end. DirecTV has to make all reasonable efforts to insure that addresses are legit. If they fail to do so, they get penalized, not the end user. This is what brought down Dish with their distant networks. What DirecTV may do to penalize the end user (such as termination of service) is unknown, since I'm unaware of any such documented cases. It's extremely unlikely that they would even do termination of service, since that would be cutting off their nose (loss of revenue) to spite their face. The most logical result would be something like a notation on the account that future service address changes have to be verified.

Penalties for legal violations (of any sort) require two prerequisites. An entity to make a complaint that a violation has occurred and an entity to enforce the law. In this case, who is going to complain? The only sources claiming financial harm are local stations. Can you really imagine local stations sending out employees to check whether a service address has a DirecTV dish visible from the street? [This assumes they can even get local address lists from DirecTV] Who else is going to complain?

The entity that polices violations is the FCC. If no one complains, why would the FCC investigate anything? They only have a few investigators to begin with and they're mostly involved with pirate radio, willful interference (ham operators, etc) and obscenity.

To be viable, scare tactics have to have some reasonable basis in reality. Just saying the boogie man will get you rarely works for adults.


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

All this would be a "moot point" if DirecTv would just allow access to your neighboring locals via satellite, they are allowed to under FCC rules......

http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/packProg/svLocalChannels.jsp?assetId=1200076

Sure wished they'd get a "move" on this....


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

Bob Coxner said:


> All this talk of fines and such, but I have yet to see anyone post a link to a legal citation clearly stating the individual penalties for a false service address. I've never heard of a single person ever being fined for it and I'm certain it would have been huge news here on the forum if it had happened.
> 
> The penalties are on the provider's end. DirecTV has to make all reasonable efforts to insure that addresses are legit. If they fail to do so, they get penalized, not the end user. This is what brought down Dish with their distant networks. What DirecTV may do to penalize the end user (such as termination of service) is unknown, since I'm unaware of any such documented cases. It's extremely unlikely that they would even do termination of service, since that would be cutting off their nose (loss of revenue) to spite their face. The most logical result would be something like a notation on the account that future service address changes have to be verified.
> 
> ...


You loose your DirecTv for life..... :lol: :lol: :lol:
pluse 3 months detention (forced to watch cable)


----------



## ddrumman2004 (Mar 28, 2007)

smellyhash said:


> It just sucks i also only get 1 local in HD and thats ABC thank god. i REALLY think D* has to step up. My neighbor came over to grab me to point out that DISH Network has the locals in HD. Ever sense that lil incident the wifey is telling me 300 dollars to cancel in order to get those 5 channels in HD is well worth it to her:grin:. D* needs to CATCH UP with the times here. They claim to be the biggest and the best yet the "little guys" are kicking there ass in local HD reception.
> 
> Sorry for the rant


I hear ya! We plan to move from our present location to Enid MS, just 10 miles away, and D* does not offer any local station programming.....yet......Dish does....the locals out of Memphis anyway, which, is what we receive here at our present location.
So that means a switch in satellite providers when we move!


----------



## hancox (Jun 23, 2004)

Shades228 said:


> It is like stealing cable because you're not watching locals that are assigned to you. That means that the local affiliates in that area are not being watched. This impacts their revenue from advertisement. It also has ramifications on things such as sports regulations. It is theft whether or not you want to argue about it or not.
> 
> There are heavy fines for this and just for having local channels isn't worth the risk. Sure you'll find other sites that have more information about how and that people never get caught but the people who do, which is a lot, don't often go posting about it either.
> 
> If you feel that much about local channels then get a service provider who meets your needs or get an OTA setup. Don't violate FCC laws and regulations because it's not worth it.


Riiiiight. So, the fact that the local cable company can show multiple locals (as they do in many DMA's that want the SV stations) wouldn't have any bearing on this?

There's a good reason that you have never heard of anyone getting bitten by this - it's because it would likely fall on its face in court.


----------



## sooner02 (Feb 21, 2009)

I have never understood who or what is actually hurt by someone receiving locals from a different market. What damage is really done if someone in Kansas wants to see local channels from St. Louis? Makes no sense to me, people should be free to choose if it's available to be transmitted by satellite.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

joshjr said:


> Wouldnt it be interesting if we could get SV channels in markets where D* did not offer locals?


If D* doesnt offer locals, and you cant get them via OTA, you should be eligible for national DNS although you would still need waivers. But it seems it would make more sense if instead of giving you the LA or NY locals, they did give you the SV channels if there are SV channels for that area.


----------



## MudMover (Jun 22, 2008)

CCarncross said:


> If D* doesnt offer locals, and you cant get them via OTA, you should be eligible for national DNS although you would still need waivers. But it seems it would make more sense if instead of giving you the LA or NY locals, they did give you the SV channels if there are SV channels for that area.


Not necessarily true. My mother lives in SW La and has weak signals from the local TV stations. KPLC (NBC Affiliate) has allowed D* access, but D* refuses to cover that market. My mother applied for national channels and was denied as they said she could get her locals OTA....yeah...right...with a 200 ft tower and a 30 dB gain antenna she might be able to hold a lock on an HD signal!


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

If any company could give you whatever locals you wanted they would. They have no reason to care what you watch as long as you would be happy.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

MudMover said:


> Not necessarily true. My mother lives in SW La and has weak signals from the local TV stations. KPLC (NBC Affiliate) has allowed D* access, but D* refuses to cover that market. My mother applied for national channels and was denied as they said she could get her locals OTA....yeah...right...with a 200 ft tower and a 30 dB gain antenna she might be able to hold a lock on an HD signal!


If the local stations deny waivers saying you can get them OTA, there is nothing D* can do, their hands are tied. Those issues need to be taken up with the local stations and possibly the FCC. D* can only offer so many local markets currently, and they do offer quite a few, what DMA is she in, is it a relatively high number like above 150? Smaller DMA's will just have to wait if they ever get carried.


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

sooner02 said:


> I have never understood who or what is actually hurt by someone receiving locals from a different market. What damage is really done if someone in Kansas wants to see local channels from St. Louis? Makes no sense to me, people should be free to choose if it's available to be transmitted by satellite.


The entity that is "hurt" is the advertiser who spends money to reach a local market. If I am a business in Kansas, and pay money to place an ad on a local TV station, but you (who are in my market) have chosen to watch St. Louis locals instead, then you are not seeing the ad that I paid for and I am not getting my money's worth. So I stop advertising, and the local station goes broke. Then everyone who watched that station loses.


----------



## DogLover (Mar 19, 2007)

sooner02 said:


> I have never understood who or what is actually hurt by someone receiving locals from a different market. What damage is really done if someone in Kansas wants to see local channels from St. Louis? Makes no sense to me, people should be free to choose if it's available to be transmitted by satellite.


Carl6 above has given the reasoning behind the law. However, making sense is something I hope for, but not really expect from the laws that are made by politicians.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

The SHVERA act is up for renewal this year. Write your congress man/woman and let them know your opinions on the matter. You can read more about it in the Regulation section.


----------



## dinotheo (Sep 22, 2006)

carl6 said:


> The entity that is "hurt" is the advertiser who spends money to reach a local market. If I am a business in Kansas, and pay money to place an ad on a local TV station, but you (who are in my market) have chosen to watch St. Louis locals instead, then you are not seeing the ad that I paid for and I am not getting my money's worth. So I stop advertising, and the local station goes broke. Then everyone who watched that station loses.


I am just curious how would they get the number of viewers in order to charge certain rates? I always assumed it was through Nielsen (or Arbitron etc..). So if you are not a Nielsen family getting a different DMA would have no effect. (I am speculating here hoping someone can fill me in).

I am ok with folks getting a different DMA than what they are "supposed" to get as long as they can receive it OTA (I know this is subject to multiple interpretations). I don't agree with people wanting locals from halfway across the country (unless you qualify for the national feeds). I live smack dab in between Wash and Baltimore. This is a huge market that is limited to half the locals that cable offers. I would imagine other large metro twin cities are in the same boat (Oakland-San Fran, Minneapolis-St.Paul etc...)
From what it sounds like, the FCC is giving DTV and Dish the green light to add SV's. Wonder what the hold up is?


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

dinotheo said:


> I am just curious how would they get the number of viewers in order to charge certain rates? I always assumed it was through Nielsen (or Arbitron etc..). So if you are not a Nielsen family getting a different DMA would have no effect. (I am speculating here hoping someone can fill me in).
> 
> I am ok with folks getting a different DMA than what they are "supposed" to get as long as they can receive it OTA (I know this is subject to multiple interpretations). I don't agree with people wanting locals from halfway across the country (unless you qualify for the national feeds). I live smack dab in between Wash and Baltimore. This is a huge market that is limited to half the locals that cable offers. I would imagine other large metro twin cities are in the same boat (Oakland-San Fran, Minneapolis-St.Paul etc...)
> From what it sounds like, the FCC is giving DTV and Dish the green light to add SV's. Wonder what the hold up is?


The hold up is the same as it always is. Who's getting $$


----------



## trainman (Jan 9, 2008)

dinotheo said:


> I am just curious how would they get the number of viewers in order to charge certain rates? I always assumed it was through Nielsen (or Arbitron etc..). So if you are not a Nielsen family getting a different DMA would have no effect. (I am speculating here hoping someone can fill me in).


True, but since Nielsen "families" are theoretically representative of the population at large, there's a certain percentage of them who would want to get a different city's local channels, if it were made possible easily.



> I live smack dab in between Wash and Baltimore. This is a huge market that is limited to half the locals that cable offers. I would imagine other large metro twin cities are in the same boat (Oakland-San Fran, Minneapolis-St.Paul etc...)


Washington and Baltimore definitely aren't "twin cities," being separated by many miles (and, thus, in separate DMAs with separate local channels). The situation is not comparable to legitimate twin cities San Francisco and Oakland (separated by only a bay) and Minneapolis and St. Paul (separated by only a river) -- those twins are in the same DMA as each other and get the same local channels.

For good examples, you need to look at reasonably-well-populated areas that are near the edge of two DMAs, such as central New Jersey (between the New York and Philadelphia DMAs), and Broward County, Florida (between the Miami and West Palm Beach DMAs).


----------



## sunfire9us (Feb 15, 2009)

I thought I would add my 2 cents in on the local tv issue. I cannot see why the law cannot be changed to where DTV and E subscribers could have the choice of watching another areas local channels as long as they are also getting their own locals. In other words just charge extra for the out of market locals. Anyways ever since DTV and E went to spotbeam tech. you really cant get much as far as falsifying your address due to the limitations of the spot beams. You could only at the most "cheat" and get the areas adjacent to you


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

Some of those adjacent areas would fall under SV channels if they were receivable OTA and should be offered anyway, even if it was for a small fee. Unfortunately the "protection" provided by the FCC is all about the "Benjamins" for local advertising dollars.


----------



## dwilli57 (Aug 12, 2009)

I live 20 min. east of Scranton PA in NE PA but the FCC has determined that NY City is my local area, 2 hrs away, because we've had so many people from there move up that the Nielson research said every body is watching NYC. Great, no school closing announcements, no local news yet the ONLY cable company here (nobody big like Comcast/Time-Warner, etc.) offers both. I griped to the FCC, they replied saying nothing they could do. I changed my "service" address at the time only to have channels screwed up/out of place/some missing. When I called D* said Scranton comes in on a different satellite and I can't "see" that satellite because of my location barely getting a SW view. I called back later, told them I moved back and gave up. This was BEFORE HD so maybe it's changed. Now I get $15/mo cable in addition to D* just to get local news.

How fair is that??? Ask the advertisers what benefit I'm giving them from 2 hrs. away.


----------



## MartyS (Dec 29, 2006)

I only have one thing to add to this discussion that I didn't see in the thread.

If you can pick it up via OTA, then D* or cable should provide the station. If I decide I want to watch the other market's locals over OTA, then why can't I watch them on D* or E* or comcrap?

That's the once fallacy in the way that they are doing things, and something reasonable should be workd out.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

MartyS said:


> If I decide I want to watch the other market's locals over OTA, then why can't I watch them on D* or E* or comcrap?


Obviously Comcast doesn't support OTA at any level so they really need to be left out of OTA discussions.

If you can receive it OTA, you can watch it. Where D* gets goofy with this is if you're seeking channels from more than two markets. You have the option of going around the D* equipment to get what you want. E* supports whatever you can get your hands on (outside of maybe the same channel number from two markets).


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

harsh said:


> E* supports whatever you can get your hands on (outside of maybe the same channel number from two markets).


Unfortunately you seem to be lost once again, this is the DirecTV forum. The forums to discuss Dish are over here.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

tcusta00 said:


> Unfortunately you seem to be lost once again, this is the DirecTV forum.


Just helping out a fellow poster who seemed to be wondering why DIRECTV can't bring themselves to implement ATSC channel scanning on the HR2x. I wanted to make sure that the differences were understood as the poster clumped D*, E* and Comcast all in the same boat with respect to how they treated OTA.


----------



## cj9788 (May 14, 2003)

It is funny threads like this one in the E* forum get closed right away, but on the D* forum it is allowed. 

Kinda screwy huh?


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

cj9788 said:


> It is funny threads like this one in the E* forum get closed right away, but on the D* forum it is allowed.
> 
> Kinda screwy huh?


The OP originally posted he didn't want to falsify his address. The Dish one was asking how to do it. This has also stayed in the area of safe for DBSTalk so it remains open. I'm sure that a few posts could make it get closed very easily.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

cj9788 said:


> It is funny threads like this one in the E* forum get closed right away, but on the D* forum it is allowed.
> 
> Kinda screwy huh?


Actually if this thread turns toward falsifying your address or any sort of fraud, it will be closed.


----------



## mcmattyo (May 27, 2007)

If you don't mind me asking what is your zip code and what locals are you trying to get?


----------



## MartyS (Dec 29, 2006)

harsh said:


> Obviously Comcast doesn't support OTA at any level so they really need to be left out of OTA discussions.
> 
> If you can receive it OTA, you can watch it. Where *D* gets goofy with this is if you're seeking channels from more than two markets*. You have the option of going around the D* equipment to get what you want. E* supports whatever you can get your hands on (outside of maybe the same channel number from two markets).


Actually, you're not quite right. D* will only feed local stations from a single market. I live less than a mile from the county line between the Miami./Ft. Lauderdale and West Palm Beach markets, and all my business is done in Miami/FTL. However, because of my zip code, D* will allow me ONLY West Palm Beach Locals.

I have no idea what Dish does, since I'm not nor have I ever been a Dish subscriber, so I don't care to comment on service that I don't or haven't had.

Comcast on the other hand, offers me at least 2 stations from Miami/FtL in addition to the WPB stations.

Keeping any provider out of OTA discussions is absurd. They're all providing feeds of the OTA channels on their respective services. If Comcast can give me channels from both markets, why won't D*? I don't expect you to answer that question, since you don't really use D*. It's really rhetorical, since I know the "official" DMA definitions and how D* works with those.

Back to my original comment, though. If I can pick it up off of OTA, then my provider should legally be able to provide me with the same spectrum of channels.


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

MartyS - you're misunderstanding harsh's post. He is talking about OTA, NOT DirecTV delivered channels. DirecTV's OTA tuners for the DVRs allow you to select two different zip codes but not more. Some people are in areas where they get stations from more than two zip codes and the DVR OTA tuners don't allow for that..


----------



## raoul5788 (May 14, 2006)

texasbrit said:


> MartyS - you're misunderstanding harsh's post. He is talking about OTA, NOT DirecTV delivered channels. DirecTV's OTA tuners for the DVRs allow you to select two different zip codes but not more. Some people are in areas where they get stations from more than two zip codes and the DVR OTA tuners don't allow for that..


Sure they do. You can select two markets to receive ota locals from with an HR20-700. It's right in the menu.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

texasbrit clearly understood, but didn't get right down to the point. OTA (Over-The-Air), by definition, is programming received via a conventional TV antenna on your property without the assistance/interference of satellite or cable. LIL (Local-Into-Local) are channels from your television DMA delivered into your home by satellite.

The distinction is important as non-OTA solutions often deny you access to subchannels.

I want to retiterate that the limitations of the DIRECTV OTA tuners are created by policy as opposed to a deficiency in the tuners themselves.

MartyS' point is not lost, it is just using the wrong terminology. Employing a DIRECTV OTA tuner solution would open up the possibility of seeing all the channels (and subchannels) in two markets (assuming that satellite reception problems aren't confounding operation of the receiver).


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

raoul5788 said:


> You can select two markets to receive ota locals from with an HR20-700.


That's what texasbrit said.

It isn't reasonable to suggest that the HR20 is the default HD DVR anymore nor that one can be easily obtained by anything other than luck of the draw.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

That is true, but if you're in a market with no locals over DIRECTV, you should be able to get an AM21 with no issue, so whichever DVR you end up with, you should be ok.


----------



## MartyS (Dec 29, 2006)

Stuart Sweet said:


> That is true, but if you're in a market with no locals over DIRECTV, you should be able to get an AM21 with no issue, so whichever DVR you end up with, you should be ok.


I understand that I can get the locals for 2 markets via OTA with an HR20 or an HR2X/AM21 combo. I have that.

However, if I don't have an outside antenna, or I live in a condo where D* has contracted with the HOA, I can only get one set of locals via the Sat, even though if I had an antenna I would get 2.

That's where I'm going... What D* should provide is whatever OTA coverage is regardless of having OTA capabilities or not.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

MartyS said:


> I understand that I can get the locals for 2 markets via OTA with an HR20 or an HR2X/AM21 combo. I have that.
> 
> However, if I don't have an outside antenna, or I live in a condo where D* has contracted with the HOA, I can only get one set of locals via the Sat, even though if I had an antenna I would get 2.
> 
> That's where I'm going... What D* should provide is whatever OTA coverage is regardless of having OTA capabilities or not.


If you have an antenna and have an HR20 or HR2x/AM21, you will receive whatever OTA channels that your antenna picks up, no matter what market they are from. The only loss of channels is if the OTA markets have channels with the same channel number. Your receiver will only display one of those channels.

If you don't have an antenna then you only get what DirecTV provides you according the LiL market you are located in. DirecTV is *only allowed* to provide you with the local channels of your market, whether or not you could have picked up another market's channels via OTA.

- Merg


----------



## LarryFlowers (Sep 22, 2006)

No... they can't... Federal law says they can't... you get your DMA that is assigned to you. DirecTV also doesn't have the capacity to be doubling up on local coverage.

Here's a thought though, is cable available to you? Do they carry all the channels that your are looking for in the way of local channels? (The same rules don't apply to them) You can get a locals only package from your cable company at a federally mandated price that is quite low. I believe it is less than $15.



MartyS said:


> I understand that I can get the locals for 2 markets via OTA with an HR20 or an HR2X/AM21 combo. I have that.
> 
> However, if I don't have an outside antenna, or I live in a condo where D* has contracted with the HOA, I can only get one set of locals via the Sat, even though if I had an antenna I would get 2.
> 
> That's where I'm going... What D* should provide is whatever OTA coverage is regardless of having OTA capabilities or not.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

dodge boy said:


> All this would be a "moot point" if DirecTv would just allow access to your neighboring locals via satellite, they are allowed to under FCC rules......
> 
> http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/packProg/svLocalChannels.jsp?assetId=1200076
> 
> Sure wished they'd get a "move" on this....


I live in CT and get the CT locals but I also get the RI locals (neighboring locals)...in SD of course :grin:

Mike


----------



## MartyS (Dec 29, 2006)

The Merg said:


> If you have an antenna and have an HR20 or HR2x/AM21, you will receive whatever OTA channels that your antenna picks up, no matter what market they are from. The only loss of channels is if the OTA markets have channels with the same channel number. Your receiver will only display one of those channels.
> 
> If you don't have an antenna then you only get what DirecTV provides you according the LiL market you are located in. DirecTV is *only allowed* to provide you with the local channels of your market, whether or not you could have picked up another market's channels via OTA.
> 
> - Merg





LarryFlowers said:


> No... they can't... Federal law says they can't... you get your DMA that is assigned to you. DirecTV also doesn't have the capacity to be doubling up on local coverage.
> 
> Here's a thought though, is cable available to you? Do they carry all the channels that your are looking for in the way of local channels? (The same rules don't apply to them) You can get a locals only package from your cable company at a federally mandated price that is quite low. I believe it is less than $15.





MicroBeta said:


> I live in CT and get the CT locals but I also get the RI locals (neighboring locals)...in SD of course :grin:
> 
> Mike


I know what the federal law says, but seemingly from this on D*s website, it isn't a federal law and D* does in fact seem to offer it somewhere. I wonder if D* would let me have it down here. If it was a federal law, then Comcast wouldn't be able to be doing it right now.

Regardless, I do have the basic cable that has the channels, and even some of them are in HD. It's just that I wish that D* from this standpoint would do what Comcast (and even their own website says) does.

Who knows... maybe I'll be able to get it soon. I'll call D* when I get back from vacation next week and see if they can tell my why its on their website, but I can't get it.


----------



## LarryFlowers (Sep 22, 2006)

According to DirecTV's web site that you link to there is no significantly viewed for Boca Raton FL, so according to the web site, you don't get them (from DirecTV).

The rules are different for the cable companies and the satellite companies. Cable has always been able to deliver significantly viewed channels, while satellite is just beginning to get this allowance and only in certain areas.



MartyS said:


> I know what the federal law says, but seemingly from this on D*s website, it isn't a federal law and D* does in fact seem to offer it somewhere. I wonder if D* would let me have it down here. If it was a federal law, then Comcast wouldn't be able to be doing it right now.
> 
> Regardless, I do have the basic cable that has the channels, and even some of them are in HD. It's just that I wish that D* from this standpoint would do what Comcast (and even their own website says) does.
> 
> Who knows... maybe I'll be able to get it soon. I'll call D* when I get back from vacation next week and see if they can tell my why its on their website, but I can't get it.


----------



## pdh0490 (Jul 28, 2008)

heres the way to go them somewhere eles as i have tryed this and it works give them anther adress and keep the billing adress the same i did this as well and it does work


----------



## LarryFlowers (Sep 22, 2006)

And that would be fraud, which isn't allowed here.



pdh0490 said:


> heres the way to go them somewhere eles as i have tryed this and it works give them anther adress and keep the billing adress the same i did this as well and it does work


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

MartyS,

You can't reason your way out of this as the rules always trump reasoning. Regardless of what anybody's website claims, implies or even hints at, the situation isn't going the change for you or anyone else unless the rules change _and_ the provider takes advantage of the rules change.


----------



## djwww98 (Jan 12, 2006)

LarryFlowers said:


> No... they can't... Federal law says they can't... you get your DMA that is assigned to you. DirecTV also doesn't have the capacity to be doubling up on local coverage.


No, capacity is not the issue. In the vast majority of these cases, the sub is in range of an existing signal. It's just a matter of allowing the sub's receiver to get it. This is why I don't understand why they don't allow more significantly viewed markets. The law says they can, and in most cases it doesn't have anything to do with capacity.
DirecTV, just do it!


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

harsh said:


> MartyS,
> 
> You can't reason your way out of this as the rules always trump reasoning. Regardless of what anybody's website claims, implies or even hints at, the situation isn't going the change for you or anyone else unless the rules change _and_ the provider takes advantage of the rules change.


What rules?

A while back, maybe a year and a half-ish, *DirecTV told me I would be getting neighboring locals*. Although I've never requested them or inquired about them, I've got them and still have them.

I also seem to remember that my DMA was at the start of rolling out neighboring locals. I forget; I wasn't paying that much attention at the time. :shrug:

Since then they seem to have stopped adding them. I'll let others speculate as to why.



LarryFlowers said:


> No... they can't... Federal law says they can't... you get your DMA that is assigned to you. DirecTV also doesn't have the capacity to be doubling up on local coverage.
> 
> Here's a thought though, is cable available to you? Do they carry all the channels that your are looking for in the way of local channels? (The same rules don't apply to them) You can get a locals only package from your cable company at a federally mandated price that is quite low. I believe it is less than $15.


I don't know that capacity is the issue.

When DirecTV told me I was eligible for neighboring locals I thought cool.

When I started receiving the RI channels they were SD only (my LiL are from CT which is good because that's where I live :grin. I assume that's the way DirecTV will do it for all neighboring locals. If so then how much bandwidth would SD channels take? I'm thinkin' not much but I've been wrong before. 

Mike


----------



## DogLover (Mar 19, 2007)

djwww98 said:


> No, capacity is not the issue. In the vast majority of these cases, the sub is in range of an existing signal. It's just a matter of allowing the sub's receiver to get it. This is why I don't understand why they don't allow more significantly viewed markets. The law says they can, and in most cases it doesn't have anything to do with capacity.
> DirecTV, just do it!


Except that most locals are on spot beams. Some of those spot beams may be large enough to encompass significantly viewed areas, but some may not be. If they are not reliably large enough, then they'd have to put the channels up on different spotbeams. So, it is partly a capacity issue.

(And don't forget the PR nightmare it could be if they can only do it for some customers and not all of them.)


----------



## bjlc (Aug 20, 2004)

I have hd 23-600's... and yet I can't find an AM 21 on the D* website. 

is Directv compelled to sell me this unit? and yes locals are now available in my area.. but we have been reluctant to turn them on due to DNS.. and even though I have been "assured" not to lose them.. 
its a deal breaker for me.. 
advise please..


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

bjlc said:


> I have hd 23-600's... and yet I can't find an AM 21 on the D* website.
> 
> is Directv compelled to sell me this unit? and yes locals are now available in my area.. but we have been reluctant to turn them on due to DNS.. and even though I have been "assured" not to lose them..
> its a deal breaker for me..
> advise please..


If your locals are available but either way I don't think they care whether or not you buy the AM21. Definitly not compelled.

Why do you not want to lose DNS? Do you get your locals in HD? I seem to recall, and I could be wrong about this, that sooner or later DNS will go away.

BTW, their are other sources for the AM21 e.g. Amazon or Solidsignal.

Mike


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

MicroBeta said:


> If your locals are available but either way I don't think they care whether or not you buy the AM21. Definitly not compelled.
> 
> Why do you not want to lose DNS? Do you get your locals in HD? I seem to recall, and I could be wrong about this, that sooner or later DNS will go away.
> 
> ...


For me I would keep DNS over my locals cause I dont have enough tuners and the west coast feeds help alot with that.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

joshjr said:


> For me I would keep DNS over my locals cause I dont have enough tuners and the west coast feeds help alot with that.


I haven't had my coffee yet so bear with me but What?


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

MicroBeta said:


> I haven't had my coffee yet so bear with me but What?


I need to be able to record more then 2 things at a time, hence the need for more tuners. If I was to get locals from D* then I would be screwed if I needed to record 3 things at the same time unless I got another DVR. With DNS feeds I can shift some things around and record the shows I want off the west coast later on and dont need the additional tuners. If I had it my way I would have a DVR that had 4 tuners and a pretty big HDD in it so that the locals would do. Then I would feel better about dropping the DNS feeds.


----------



## whitepelican (May 9, 2007)

joshjr said:


> I need to be able to record more then 2 things at a time, hence the need for more tuners. If I was to get locals from D* then I would be screwed if I needed to record 3 things at the same time unless I got another DVR. With DNS feeds I can shift some things around and record the shows I want off the west coast later on and dont need the additional tuners. If I had it my way I would have a DVR that had 4 tuners and a pretty big HDD in it so that the locals would do. Then I would feel better about dropping the DNS feeds.


It's cheaper to pay the $5/month for an extra DVR than it is to pay for DNS. Assuming you could get a deal on the up-front cost of the DVR.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

joshjr said:


> I need to be able to record more then 2 things at a time, hence the need for more tuners. If I was to get locals from D* then I would be screwed if I needed to record 3 things at the same time unless I got another DVR. With DNS feeds I can shift some things around and record the shows I want off the west coast later on and dont need the additional tuners. If I had it my way I would have a DVR that had 4 tuners and a pretty big HDD in it so that the locals would do. Then I would feel better about dropping the DNS feeds.


I figured it out when the coffee kicked in, sorry. :grin:

Mike


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

bjlc said:


> I have hd 23-600's... and yet I can't find an AM 21 on the D* website.
> 
> is Directv compelled to sell me this unit? and yes locals are now available in my area.. but we have been reluctant to turn them on due to DNS.. and even though I have been "assured" not to lose them..
> its a deal breaker for me..
> advise please..


Make sure you don't have one in your shopping cart already. Once added to your cart, it disappears from the site as a possible purchase.

- Merg


----------



## elaclair (Jun 18, 2004)

MicroBeta said:


> I live in CT and get the CT locals but I also get the RI locals (neighboring locals)...in SD of course :grin:
> 
> Mike


Ah, Rotten-Groton, I remember you well.......


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

whitepelican said:


> It's cheaper to pay the $5/month for an extra DVR than it is to pay for DNS. Assuming you could get a deal on the up-front cost of the DVR.


I dont get my locals from D* yet and am not completely happy with the OTA I am using at this time. For now DNS will stay no matter what. Once I get some kind of locals from D* then it may be a different story.


----------



## MartyS (Dec 29, 2006)

DogLover said:


> Except that most locals are on spot beams. Some of those spot beams may be large enough to encompass significantly viewed areas, but some may not be. If they are not reliably large enough, then they'd have to put the channels up on different spotbeams. So, it is partly a capacity issue.
> 
> (And don't forget the PR nightmare it could be if they can only do it for some customers and not all of them.)


Maybe I'm wrong, but the locals that I'm talking about are already on the spot beam. The Miami/Ft. Lauderdale and West Palm Beach are there and being broadcast right now. So, I don't think it's a capacity issue. It's a matter of activating the channels for that receiver... at least that's my impression.

So, since I'm less than one mile away from the Miami/Ft. Lauderdale DMA line, bandwidth and spot beams shouldn't be the issue.


----------



## raoul5788 (May 14, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> What rules?
> 
> A while back, maybe a year and a half-ish, *DirecTV told me I would be getting neighboring locals*. Although I've never requested them or inquired about them, I've got them and still have them.
> 
> ...


I am in CT also, but get the sv from NYC, just in sd. We used to get WNBC in hd because WVIT, the CT local, was an O & O. That has gone away, the hd from WNBC that is. It doesn't take any more bandwidth to give me locals from NYC since I am in the footprint for their spotbeam. They only need to authorize me to get them like any other channel.


----------



## DogLover (Mar 19, 2007)

MartyS said:


> Maybe I'm wrong, but the locals that I'm talking about are already on the spot beam. The Miami/Ft. Lauderdale and West Palm Beach are there and being broadcast right now. So, I don't think it's a capacity issue. It's a matter of activating the channels for that receiver... at least that's my impression.
> 
> So, since I'm less than one mile away from the Miami/Ft. Lauderdale DMA line, bandwidth and spot beams shouldn't be the issue.


That may be true in your case, but what if someone is on the outer edge ofthe DMA, will the spotbeams for the other DMA cover that? What about people in other areas of the country and their DMA coverage? Do they provide significantly viewed channels for some of their customers, but not other areas?

Don't get me wrong, I think they'd get another leg up on the cable companies if they would offer significantly viewed. However, we can assume they would like their income to grow. And we can assume that they'd charge for these significantly viewed channels. Therefore, there must be some reason why they don't. That reason would seem to be either government regulation or too high a cost. Why else wouldn't they do it?


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

It' would be kinda nice to be able to get any locals that neighborhing spot beams cover you.

For example, here in Cleveland, there's pretty good overlap from Detroit, Pittsburgh, Columbus & Youngstown.

All they would need to do is add a disclaimer of some sort saying that they may work, they may not. If not, sorry, don't call us to complain. Especially for those on the edge of the neighborhing spots.


----------



## djwww98 (Jan 12, 2006)

MartyS said:


> Maybe I'm wrong, but the locals that I'm talking about are already on the spot beam. The Miami/Ft. Lauderdale and West Palm Beach are there and being broadcast right now. So, I don't think it's a capacity issue. It's a matter of activating the channels for that receiver... at least that's my impression.
> 
> So, since I'm less than one mile away from the Miami/Ft. Lauderdale DMA line, bandwidth and spot beams shouldn't be the issue.


Nope, you are not wrong. This is my point exactly. It doesn't take any bandwidth, it's not against any rules or regulations... why don't they just do it? A better product for the customer is right there, if they would just give it to us. Why not? Because they don't want to be bothered with it? I don't get it.


----------



## sunfire9us (Feb 15, 2009)

I believe you are coming back to the fact we are only supposed to be watching our own local tv stations. I know for a fact where I live at, there are over 5-6 spotbeams I can pick up ranging from the ones that carry the STL, Indianapolis,Chicago,and several within my immediate area (including our own) yet by law we are not supposed to be watching the ones out of our areas. Yeah we can usually pick the local spotbeams adjacent to our areas but it always comes back up to the sorry laws on only watching your local tv stations.


----------



## raoul5788 (May 14, 2006)

DogLover said:


> That may be true in your case, but what if someone is on the outer edge ofthe DMA, will the spotbeams for the other DMA cover that? What about people in other areas of the country and their DMA coverage? Do they provide significantly viewed channels for some of their customers, but not other areas?
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I think they'd get another leg up on the cable companies if they would offer significantly viewed. However, we can assume they would like their income to grow. And we can assume that they'd charge for these significantly viewed channels. Therefore, there must be some reason why they don't. That reason would seem to be either government regulation or too high a cost. Why else wouldn't they do it?


Yes, they do provide SV channels for some. Here in CT we get them from either NYC, Providence, or Boston depending on which county you are in. We are one of the few areas that get them. There is no extra charge for them.


----------



## MartyS (Dec 29, 2006)

sunfire9us said:


> I believe you are coming back to the fact we are only supposed to be watching our own local tv stations. I know for a fact where I live at, there are over 5-6 spotbeams I can pick up ranging from the ones that carry the STL, Indianapolis,Chicago,and several within my immediate area (including our own) yet by law we are not supposed to be watching the ones out of our areas. Yeah we can usually pick the local spotbeams adjacent to our areas but it always comes back up to the sorry laws on only watching your local tv stations.


Yes, but can you pick up all those stations OTA? From all those markets? That becomes the issue here. If you can pick up the station with an outdoor antenna in your area, then you should be able to see them via DirecTV's spot beams.

I can pick up Miami/Ft. Lauderale and West Palm Beach on my antenna. I can't pick up Orlando, Tampa, Ft. Myers or any others via OTA, so I really don't want those... just the ones I can watch and not have to pay D* for.


----------



## raoul5788 (May 14, 2006)

harsh said:


> That's what texasbrit said.
> 
> It isn't reasonable to suggest that the HR20 is the default HD DVR anymore nor that one can be easily obtained by anything other than luck of the draw.


*YOU* were talking about ota. That makes it not only reasonable but required that we are talking about the HR20. What other dvr has an ota tuner?


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

raoul5788 said:


> What other dvr has an ota tuner?


All of them (with the addition of an AM21). Works just fine.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

carl6 said:


> All of them (with the addition of an AM21). Works just fine.


+1, Every current HD receiver is now OTA capable with the the AM21, so the HR20 is not the only game in town


----------



## raoul5788 (May 14, 2006)

carl6 said:


> All of them (with the addition of an AM21). Works just fine.


Yes, of course, but that's not what Harsh was talking about.


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

raoul5788 said:


> Yes, of course, but that's not what Harsh was talking about.


He is not a DirecTV subscriber, does not have DirecTV equipment, and consequently sometimes misses the target.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

carl6 said:


> He is not a DirecTV subscriber, does not have DirecTV equipment, and consequently sometimes misses the target.


The target, as established in raoul5788's post #73, was just the HR20. That other receivers in combination with the AM21 weren't mentioned was in response to a specific post that look an awful lot like a recommendation for an HR20.

For those who believe that they should be able to tune whatever reaches them, that's not how the law is written with respect to DBS. What can be made available is very well defined and does not necessarily include whatever the subscriber might want.

If there are enough who are vocal with the right people (you're preaching to the choir at DBSTalk), there may eventually be some changes.


----------

