# 111 Mllion TV Homes, 64% Have Cable



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

SkyReport:


> On Monday, Nielsen released data that shows the average U.S. home received 104.2 channels via the television set in 2006, an increase of almost eight channels since figures collected in 2005.
> 
> And as the selection of channels available to a household increases, so does the number of channels tuned in by viewers. In 2006, the average household watched 15.7, or 15.1 percent, of the 104.2 channels available for at least 10 minutes per week, said Nielsen.
> 
> ...


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

Very interesting numbers. If true, only 13% of households get their TV OTA. But even that number is not quit true because there are satallite subs that get locals OTA (HD and/or SD). It does punctuate the decline of OTA viewers. I wonder how many of that 13% already have digital capable TV's. Congress needs to watch this number to determine the true cost of the digital converter STB program.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Congress needs to just stay out of the converter upgrade business. If they didn't feel the need to buy people a TV and install an OTA antenna... why would they feel the need to supply a converter box?


----------



## tomcrown1 (Jan 16, 2006)

HDMe said:


> Congress needs to just stay out of the converter upgrade business. If they didn't feel the need to buy people a TV and install an OTA antenna... why would they feel the need to supply a converter box?


Hay!!!

I want congress to buy me my next HDTV.-------------


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

HDMe said:


> Congress needs to just stay out of the converter upgrade business. If they didn't feel the need to buy people a TV and install an OTA antenna... why would they feel the need to supply a converter box?


Like it or not, Congress is in it big time. Congress is behind the digital change over. The government will sell the freed spectrum for many billions. The coupon program is to deflect any criticism that some will have to buy new sets just to watch TV, you know, the poor and old etc, etc. Get new sets for the poor, well Congress is not that generous. Cuts into their pork money.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

My point was... the government should not be paying (using taxpayer money) to supply people with things like converter boxes to watch TV.

When you buy a TV there is never any guarantee that you will receive TV broadcasts. Sure, you may reasonably think you will be able to do so... but I've never seen any TV come with a guarantee of reception of broadcasts. Same goes for radios.

Anyone who can afford a TV, antenna, and a home + electricity to power their TV can most definately afford a converter box.

If government (taxpayer money) is going to "help" people out, I feel much better helping the hungry, homeless, or sick than I do helping people to watch TV.


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

Cable, the technology of the 1950s, continues its decline. In 10 years, it will be under 50%. In the near future it will be unknown in single unit homes.


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

HDMe said:


> My point was... the government should not be paying (using taxpayer money) to supply people with things like converter boxes to watch TV.
> 
> When you buy a TV there is never any guarantee that you will receive TV broadcasts. Sure, you may reasonably think you will be able to do so... but I've never seen any TV come with a guarantee of reception of broadcasts. Same goes for radios.
> 
> ...


The government is making analoge TV sets obsolete for OTA viewers and making billions in the process. Even when the government takes your land through eminent domain they give you something in return. Maybe not the actual worth but hey, its the government. The same holds true here. The revenue they make from selling off the freed up spectrum will more than pay for this program.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

SamC said:


> Cable, the technology of the 1950s, continues its decline. In 10 years, it will be under 50%. In the near future it will be unknown in single unit homes.


Obviously, you've bought into satellite's big lie - hook, line and sinker. Whatever you're
smoking, I don't think I want any, and remind me not to bet on any of your ponies, either.

:nono2:


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

lwilli201 said:


> The government is making analoge TV sets obsolete for OTA viewers and making billions in the process. Even when the government takes your land through eminent domain they give you something in return. Maybe not the actual worth but hey, its the government. The same holds true here. The revenue they make from selling off the freed up spectrum will more than pay for this program.


But when they take land... they take land... it isn't yours anymore.

A TV can still be used with a VCR or a DVD player or a video game system... many other uses besides OTA. Plus, there is no guarantee of TV. TV is a luxury item.

Our government should be ashamed of buying people converter boxes when there are other people who don't even have a house! Is the government going to give the homeless people converter box vouchers too?


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

Nick said:


> Obviously, you've bought into satellite's big lie - hook, line and sinker. Whatever you're
> smoking, I don't think I want any, and remind me not to bet on any of your ponies, either.


Better picture. Better sound. Available everywhere. Almost every channel going, with channel carriage decisions not made by insider dealing to a much less degree. Not being told by some rude and clueless CSR to "pound sand".

Yep. Hook, line and sinker.


----------



## AllieVi (Apr 10, 2002)

I believe the long-term winner will be whoever provides FTTH (fiber-to-the-home). Verizon is already in the game (as are others) and the "cable" companies that make the switch will have a distinct advantage over satellite. Dishes are coming down all around me as people sign up for Verizon's FiOS that's now available.

Satellite will always be the choice in rural America, but it won't really make sense in fibered areas. Fiber rollout will be slow but relentless.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

SamC said:


> Cable, the technology of the 1950s, continues its decline. In 10 years, it will be under 50%. In the near future it will be unknown in single unit homes.


Do not agree. I am having Verizon Fios installed tomorrow. Look at the channel
lineup that they offer for $43 a month. http://tv.msn.com/tv/guide/Default.aspx
3 HD RSNs, 15 HD local channels, 5 premium HD movie channels, and 11 national
HD channels. Fios is a new form of cable upgraded. Have had the Internet Service
since the beginning of January and the 20/5 speed is unbelievable. More
dramatic than the difference between dial up and standard cable modem at 7/1.
With a bundle discount, my $43 price drops to $32 a month. I have a choice of
four HD providers, Verizon Fios, digital cable, Directv and Dish. Verizon is by 
far the cheapest and has the most robust channel lineup (something for everyone
including HD sports). It is well priced to participate in the HD boom, as HD is
adopted by mainstream middle America. Dish Network with its $20 HD fee and Directv with its $11 HD fee not are not priced to participate in the growth of HD
among the average american TV home. Satellite HD is currently priced for upper income TV homes. I have had both Dish HD and digital cable HD for three years and will give both up for Fios.

However, Verizon Fios TV is in only ten states, so in many areas of the United States, satellite HD may be better value than digital cable HD because the cable company does not have any local cable competition and overcharges and provides less channels, like my digital cable provider, Patriot Media. Verizon has brought much needed competition against local cable companies that had virtual monopolies in Internet Service which allowed the cable company to charge a premium price for TV service because they figured the sub would likely sign up with them because of Internet and phone service.

Verizon now has statewide franchises in California and New Jersey. There is legislation pending in New York and Pennsylvania for statewide franchises. With this new enhanced competitively priced HD cable service in a few big states, satellite growth will slow down.


----------



## Cholly (Mar 22, 2004)

SamC said:


> Cable, the technology of the 1950s, continues its decline. In 10 years, it will be under 50%. In the near future it will be unknown in single unit homes.


That may well be, when FIOS becomes generally available. For now, cable for many people (like me) is cheaper than satellite and PQ and audio quality are equal. 
As to rude CSR's, both satellite providers have plenty of them.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

SamC said:


> Better picture. Better sound. Available everywhere. Almost every channel going, with channel carriage decisions not made by insider dealing to a much less degree. Not being told by some rude and clueless CSR to "pound sand".
> 
> Yep. Hook, line and sinker.


I'm so sorry. You must be talking about your own sad experience with your provider

You are obviously not familiar with my excellent, well-run local cable franchise nor would I expect you to be. I will gladly put my extensive array of channels, locals from two nearby cities in two states, no less than six HD network locals, including PBS-HD, 28 more premium movie channels than my former satco whom I was with for five years, 23 HD channels, including nine new HD channels since the first of the year and more to come, multiple, multiple RSNs, outstanding customer service, same-day or next-day on-site tech support, direct email contact with the local GM, no up-front charge for two flawlessly-performing HD DVRs, and high-end full-package programming, all at $25 less per month than my previous satco's highest and best package.

I had sat and still have a dish tree on my patio, but when I compared available MCVP providers a year and a half ago, local cable came out way ahead of both D* and E*, and my cableco, who offered me a month's _free_ trial of their full programming slate, including HD, came way out ahead of sat and it's only gotten better since.

Oh, and I still get TWC's "Locals on the 8s" with actual local weather conditions and relevant local forecasts, which I assume you do not, not to mention all those other live 24/7 local wx and radar channels as I so cleverly pointed out to you in an earlier post.

Finally, I will gladly put my cableco's uncompressed, razor-sharp, crystal-clear HD PQ against that over-compressed crap you are putting up with any day of the week. Even my SD is sharper on both of my HDTVs than the garbage you are forced up with to put. Honestly, I don't know why you pay good money for what I have personally seen and would classify as _fuzzy-wuzzy_ tv.

You can't top what I've got, and you'd be stupid to even try. If you choose to continue your pointless attacks and pursue your weak arguments against my excellent cable service, you go right ahead. You'll only fail, and further demonstrate your ignorance of the facts which I have so carefully spelled out for your edification.

My advice: Give it up, my uninformed compadre, and spend your time on more worthwhile pursuits.

It's been my pleasure to enlighten you.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

Fios may be too expensive for Verizon. They're already looking to sell their non-wireless assets in New Hampshire, Vermont and Maine. They have a deal pending to sell to a rural phone/DSL provider that unfortunately for me INCLUDES their fiber assets (I went Fios last September for internet and phone and was hoping the press release about TV would be implemented soon).


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

djlong said:


> Fios may be too expensive for Verizon. They're already looking to sell their non-wireless assets in New Hampshire, Vermont and Maine. They have a deal pending to sell to a rural phone/DSL provider that unfortunately for me INCLUDES their fiber assets (I went Fios last September for internet and phone and was hoping the press release about TV would be implemented soon).


The sale of Verizon operations in New Hampshire, Vermont and Maine seem
to have nothing to do with Fios. Here is an article about it:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/ne..._me_vt_to_fairpoint/?rss_id=Boston.com+/+News

Seems to be a strategic business decision to get out of New Hampshire, Vermont
and Maine. In the states where Verizon is concentrating its main business, Fios is here to stay. Verizon is the former Bell Atlantic. The three main states where Bell Atlantic was located are New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

There was very little Fios infrastructure built in New Hampshire as compared to
the other states where Verizon is focusing its business.

The potential fees from triple play, Internet, TV and telephone are enormous. The little cable company that serves my part of NJ, had about 80,000 TV subs, 50,000 cable modems, and 10,000 telephone customers at the end of 2006. The owners of my cable company bought the system from RCN about four years ago and outbid Cablevision for it. Four years ago, the company had virtually no cable modems or telephone customers. In outbidding Cablevision, the new owners charged higher TV fees than either Comcast or Cablevision, and provided less expensive TV channels, because they had no competition. They charged whatever they wanted for cable modems, because there was no competition. All of a sudden, they had a great business because people signed up for cable modems. In bidding against Cablevision, they could bid higher because Cablevision was stuck with the rates that they were charging their other 1,000,000 subs in NJ. The new owners charged the subs whatever they wanted.

Verizon has come along with a much much better (20/5 speed vs 7/1) and lower priced cable modem (Fios). The Fios TV offering in NJ is cheaper and better than Dish, Directv, Comcast, Cablevision, and my local cable company, Patriot Media. It is here to stay.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

> Better picture.


Cable doesn't do HD Lite, DirecTV does. All of my HD channels are full rez. A/B comparison TW beats DirecTV for SD.



> Better sound


45 premium movie channels with Dolby Digital audio feeds, how many does DirecTV have again? Oh yeah about 10.



> Almost every channel going, with channel carriage decisions not made by insider dealing to a much less degree.


HBO Zone, Showtime Next, Showtime Women, Showtime Family Zone, Outermax, Thrillermax, Inde Plex, Retro Plex, Military History Channel, Outdoor Channel 2 HD, Versus/Golf HD, MHD, CSPAN 3, CNN International, AZN TV, Black Family Channel, VH1 Pure Country, MTV Hits, MTV Jamz, VH1 Soul and the list goes on. But yeah, when it comes to shopping channels and public interest satellite has the most variety. My cable system has 4 shopping channels, and 2 community access, sucks to be me.



> Not being told by some rude and clueless CSR to "pound sand".


Hmm I've never been told to 'pound sand' by TW CSRs but I have had DirecTV swear up and down they carry Buffalo locals in HD along with InHD. Only _had_ to contact TW customer service twice, one of those resulted in a full invoice credit. I do try to call up once a month to check on availability of Digital Phone service in my area, while I do get the standard 'we're working on getting it to you as soon as possible' more often then not, I've never had CSRs be rude to me.

22 HD channels and 15Mb broadband, hot damn! I love the 1950s :lol:


----------



## brownclown (Feb 28, 2007)

Nick said:


> I'm so sorry. You must be talking about your own sad experience with your provider
> 
> You are obviously not familiar with my excellent, well-run local cable franchise nor would I expect you to be. I will gladly put my extensive array of channels, locals from two nearby cities in two states, no less than six HD network locals, including PBS-HD, 28 more premium movie channels than my former satco whom I was with for five years, 23 HD channels, including nine new HD channels since the first of the year and more to come, multiple, multiple RSNs, outstanding customer service, same-day or next-day on-site tech support, direct email contact with the local GM, no up-front charge for two flawlessly-performing HD DVRs, and high-end full-package programming, all at $25 less per month than my previous satco's highest and best package.
> 
> ...


 Nick, who is your provider? The reason I ask is because I have Time Warner's all digital service with 3 sa8300hd dvr's running passport and couldn't agree with you more. Dish is still up in my house for comparison, it will be shut off tomorrow. Before that I was a Directv sub since they flipped the switch. The only reason I would even think of going back to dtv is because of the sunday ticket and mlb, but I can live with going to my brothers house(directv sub) and watch on football sundays. I'll let him pay for it.


----------



## brownclown (Feb 28, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> Cable doesn't do HD Lite, DirecTV does. All of my HD channels are full rez. A/B comparison TW beats DirecTV for SD.
> 
> 45 premium movie channels with Dolby Digital audio feeds, how many does DirecTV have again? Oh yeah about 10.
> 
> ...


Steve, have you ever seen the movie "Wrong Turn"? I wouldn't drive off the highway in WV if I were you.:lol: :lol: :eek2:


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

brownclown said:


> Nick, who is your provider?


Now Comcast, formerly Adelphia here.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

AllieVi said:


> I believe the long-term winner will be whoever provides FTTH (fiber-to-the-home). Verizon is already in the game (as are others) and the "cable" companies that make the switch will have a distinct advantage over satellite.


FIOS was supposed to be FTTH with switched digital programming, but they bailed on it at the last minute. FIOS is just good old fashioned QAM based "CATV" using just a little more fiber (last few feet) than conventional cable does. Real fiber is FTTD.

They've differentiated themselves with pricing, but do you really expect that they will be able to hold those prices forever?


----------



## AllieVi (Apr 10, 2002)

harsh said:


> FIOS was supposed to be FTTH with switched digital programming, but they bailed on it at the last minute. FIOS is just good old fashioned QAM based "CATV" using just a little more fiber (last few feet) than conventional cable does. Real fiber is FTTD.
> 
> They've differentiated themselves with pricing, but do you really expect that they will be able to hold those prices forever?


What's FTTD?

I haven't traced the fiber that comes to my house back to the central office, of course, but I'm told it's fibered all the way. You seem to be disputing that claim. I don't know what they're doing in other locations.

The ability to hold prices will ultimately be determined by market penetration. If VZ can't convince a large number of potential customers to take the service, it'll certainly have to raise rates to cover the fixed costs. If, on the other hand, it gets more subscribers than projected, it would be able to be profitable without raising rates.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

brownclown said:


> Steve, have you ever seen the movie "Wrong Turn"? I wouldn't drive off the highway in WV if I were you.:lol: :lol: :eek2:


Awesome movie. A few years ago I went to Wheeling for the weekend, Wrong Turn could have been a video diary of the trip :lol:


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

AllieVi said:


> What's FTTD?


"Fiber To The Desktop".


> I haven't traced the fiber that comes to my house back to the central office, of course, but I'm told it's fibered all the way. You seem to be disputing that claim.


The typical FIOS install involves fiber to the house and coax inside. This differs from cable by a few dozen feet of coax being replaced with fiber.

Hopefully Uverse sticks with the switched diigital plan.


----------

