  vrettePremium
join:2000-07-22
Lombard, IL | Antenna anyone? There is this thing called an antenna, and OTA broadcasting... unless Mr. Kerry lives in the boondocks, he should check it out.
But really, the whole thing is ridiculous. The current model doesn't work, and the whole industry needs to work together to come up with a new model that works for everyone. That will of course never happen, because of a little thing called greed.
--
Chairman of the Bored... | |
|
 | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: Antenna anyone? If he lives in the boondocks he can't get TWC either so...
...
;p | |
|
| |  bentand IngaPremium
join:2004-10-04
Loveland, CO | Re: Antenna anyone? It'll be a good month to be a DBS salesman in TWC serviced areas...
--
Greedy Old Pigs v. The Donkey Show | |
|
| |
| | vrettePremium
join:2000-07-22
Lombard, IL | Re: Antenna anyone? I was being sarcastic... It does suck for a lot of people.
--
Chairman of the Bored... | |
|
| |  FBGuyyippee ki yayPremium
join:2005-03-19 | i can understand why pro sports is not OTA. but college gets tax dollars. that should always be OTA.
--
sbcglobal.net speedtest result 11/11/09 - 5256kbps | |
|
| | |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: Antenna anyone? said by FBGuy:i can understand why pro sports is not OTA. but college gets tax dollars. that should always be OTA. So do pro sports. Stadiums for professional teams are routinely paid for by taxpayers.
IMO any such arrangement should require that any game played in said arena be free to the taxpayers which paid for it, and as you said, also be on off-air TV.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|
| | | Mark F
join:2007-08-01
Fort Wayne, IN | Tax dollars do indeed pay for pro sports in a variety of ways. The city of Indianapolis is paying $750,000,000 for Lucas Oil Stadium, home of the #1 Colts, for example.
And, as for college sports, they are carried on ESPN and the Big 10 Network, to name two.
TW serves an area near here, which is why a local newspaper ran the ad from TW, that looked like a ransom note clipped from old magazines.
It may be a scare tactic. But, I wlso read online that most of the nearly 2,000 OTA stations in America could be gone in less than 10 years if cable and the various networks can't settle things. I would think that is a gross overexaggeration, but who knows for sure.
Mark F | |
|
| |
| | | both of these companies are evil and only want to milk us of our money.
i would just string up an antenna and do yourself a favor and cancel slime warner too. | |
|
| | | said by vrette:There is this thing called an antenna, and OTA broadcasting... unless Mr. Kerry lives in the boondocks, he should check it out. But really, the whole thing is ridiculous. The current model doesn't work, and the whole industry needs to work together to come up with a new model that works for everyone. That will of course never happen, because of a little thing called greed. Speed, FX , FSN, FOX News and others are not on Antenna. | |
|
|  acid343211Hallo lisa Aus AmerikaPremium
join:2001-08-31
Byron, GA | said by vrette:There is this thing called an antenna, and OTA broadcasting... unless Mr. Kerry lives in the boondocks, he should check it out. Cable going up Directv also am looking into getting OTA and save me over $130 per month. 
Looking at getting this »www.bestbuy.com/site/Antennas+Di···p=1&lp=2
--
Visit-
www.liveleak.com/view?i=e32_1231680425 | |
|
| | |
| | | acid343211Hallo lisa Aus AmerikaPremium
join:2001-08-31
Byron, GA | Re: Antenna anyone? Thanks for the Link i can use my J from my Directv,,,
--
Visit-
www.liveleak.com/view?i=e32_1231680425 | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Antenna anyone? said by rawwhide:Save even more money and DIY ... (youtube clip) yup, thats what i built,, even solderd the connections.. still only get the one channel  | |
|
| | | | | |  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Antenna anyone? said by thedragonmas:said by rawwhide:Save even more money and DIY ... (youtube clip) yup, thats what i built,, even solderd the connections.. still only get the one channel That's because the idiot in the video is building it to the wrong specs. Not to mention he's attatching the phase lines and bow-ties directly to the wood. I'm not sure why everyone takes this idiot's word as if he's some sort of god.
Also in your case you have stations in all different direction so having it in one spot isn't going to work. Also Albany, GA seems to be in a bit of a fringe area. Getting that thing at least 20-25 feet in the air will help quite bit. Also it seems many of your stations are VHF even one on LOW-VHF which this antenna even if built correctly is NOT made for.
re-do that antenna.
»www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8jsDxNgHn4 | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Re: Antenna anyone? err,, not to his specs sorry, shoulda mentiond that,, all wire except the uh arials? where insulated, solderd the connections, and used RG6 quad shield..
ive tryd two different "off the shelf" antennas,,
»www.walmart.com/catalog/product.···11019010
and one i cant seem to find now.. both vhf and uhf. this one here ive taken outside and mounted on a cloths line pole just for testing,, i can get a channel or two out of florida,, but never any locals, even tho both fox and nbc's studios are in town..
before this digital mess i could get them just fine,, ok sure they where fuzzy but i could hear um, and see um, now, nothing.
im not willing to buy a db4, pole, preamp, and going threw the trouble of getting the landloard to o.k. the install, just to find out "oops, still cant get um!" and be out $150+
fcc needs to up the power on these stations. if people cant get um with rabbit ears any more 99.9999% arent going to be willing to install an antenna system. | |
|
| | | | | | | | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Antenna anyone? said by thedragonmas:err,, not to his specs sorry, shoulda mentiond that,, all wire except the uh arials? where insulated, solderd the connections, and used RG6 quad shield.. ive tryd two different "off the shelf" antennas,, » www.walmart.com/catalog/product.···11019010and one i cant seem to find now.. both vhf and uhf. this one here ive taken outside and mounted on a cloths line pole just for testing,, i can get a channel or two out of florida,, but never any locals, even tho both fox and nbc's studios are in town.. before this digital mess i could get them just fine,, ok sure they where fuzzy but i could hear um, and see um, now, nothing. im not willing to buy a db4, pole, preamp, and going threw the trouble of getting the landloard to o.k. the install, just to find out "oops, still cant get um!" and be out $150+ fcc needs to up the power on these stations. if people cant get um with rabbit ears any more 99.9999% arent going to be willing to install an antenna system. Rabbit ears are for VHF. Most digital stations are on UHF. Also MOST people are not in your situation. As I said you have stations all over the place, as in all directions. Of course an antenna in one posisiton can't pick up stations in all directions unless you live close to the towers. Your situation is not like most people. Also most people live within 30 miles of their towers so small indoor antenna will work for MOST people. Hell I lvie 70-75 miles form the Nashville towers and I can get some them in and trust me I don't have flat terrain between me and Nashville. And I'm getting them in with antennas I made and I'm not using a pre-amp or a mast. And mine are 8 feet or less in the air.
The FCC isn't going to increase power because of interference issues.
You say you don't want to be out $150. Well even only count basic cable I'm not talking expanded basic I mean basic basic from Charter( my cable provider ) is $30 a month. I'm sure you pricing is similar within 5-6 months you've broken even. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
1 edit | Re: Antenna anyone?
channels |
my point still stands, before digital it worked, now it dont.
edit:
where do you get that stations are all over the place? our local nbc and fox affiliate share the exact SAME tower. the only station id have a problem with would be our PBS affiliate, and thats because they had to move there transmitter for, you guessed it, digital, with analog it was inline with the fox and nbc tower.
with analog i could have the antenna in the general direction of the 3 stations and i was fine. now i should still be able to do that for NBC and FOX since they share the exact same tower. pbs would be the only one id have to move the antenna for. | |
|
| | | | | I built my 2 DB4s for less than half that price (estimated price: $8 + ~1 hour of my time). sure, they look ugly, but beats using the old rabbit ears or spend money on a 'digital' (LOL) TV antennae. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Antenna anyone? said by cornelius785:I built my 2 DB4s for less than half that price (estimated price: $8 + ~1 hour of my time). sure, they look ugly, but beats using the old rabbit ears or spend money on a 'digital' (LOL) TV antennae. yeah,,, i tryd that too.. still only get one station. when i should be getting 3. even antenna web shows 0 channels for a ground level dwelling,, pop in multistory and you get all 3.. | |
|
| | | yeah? i tryd, in the middle of the city, i get ONE ota channel.. nbc. thats it, nothing else, period. but if uncle sam wants to pay for a big ole outdoor mast with a high gain directional antenna thanks to there debacle they call dtv, there welcome to. | |
|
|  stinger
join:2001-03-22
Florissant, MO
 ·AT&T Midwest
| The whole OTA controversy may soon become a moot point if (Fox, NBC, CBS, ABC) have their way.
Some genius (definition: "pencil-neck bean counter") has proposed a solution to prop up the bottom line of the balance sheets for these multi-zillion dollar corporations.
The idea is to begin charging (local independently owned and the local affiliate stations) a fee to carry their programming.
Any guesses as to how those local stations will recoup those fees?
It will be passed along to the consumer with a few administrative costs and applicable (State and Federal) taxes added on top.
If we sleep through this one folks, free OTA television will be long gone forever. | |
|
| | FBGuyyippee ki yayPremium
join:2005-03-19 | Re: Antenna anyone? how do you pay a fee for OTA tv? | |
|
| | | | | Re: Antenna anyone? said by FBGuy:how do you pay a fee for OTA tv? simple, they move to the cable model, no more OTA, you pay for cable, cable in turn pays them $X per customer, like say $0.50 per sub per channel, in the case of say nbc, thats nbc, and weather plus. so thats $1 per sub per month..
instead of doing it the way its SUPPOSED to work where they get paid by comercials, frankly we shouldnt have to pay JACK for any basic cable channel, they all get paid by comercials any way, if there going to change to this model, then they need to lose the comercials, but thatl never happen. | |
|
| | | | FBGuyyippee ki yayPremium
join:2005-03-19 | Re: Antenna anyone? but then its not OTA. your talking about cable tv that already exists.
--
sbcglobal.net speedtest result 11/11/09 - 5256kbps | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: Antenna anyone? said by FBGuy:but then its not OTA. your talking about cable tv that already exists. and your not paying attention... the big networks are losing money with ota and want to switch to the pay tv model where there would be NO MORE OTA,, so they can get a fee per sub, AND the profits from advertisers, as it stands now its advertisers only,, in other words they want to be greedy. and frankly thanks to the digital transition they actually have fodder for it by simply pointing out 25% or more of people can no longer get OTA..
hell im in the middle of the city and cant get it. id need to pay out the butt for an outdoor antenna just to get three channels. plus i rent so i have that consideration (ya know, you install it, you leave it). | |
|
| | | | | | FBGuyyippee ki yayPremium
join:2005-03-19 | Re: Antenna anyone? correct me if i'm wrong but it was my understanding that certain stations were required to maintain their OTA broadcasts. or is that not required anymore?
--
sbcglobal.net speedtest result 11/11/09 - 5256kbps | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Re: Antenna anyone? said by FBGuy:correct me if i'm wrong but it was my understanding that certain stations were required to maintain their OTA broadcasts. or is that not required anymore? for a certain amount of time, they are called "must carry" stations, however, after the "must carry" status is removed, the stations negotiate a price with the cable/sat companys, a price that is passed on to you.. | |
|
JohnAPremium
join:2003-09-16
Pittsburgh, PA | Kerry threatens News Corp / Fox
Arrogance gone to seed. | |
|
|
See 14 replies to this post |
|
Pv8man
join:2008-07-24
Hammond, IN | wow Said by Kerry
"Fox and Time Warner need to strike a deal - millions of football fans are depending on it"
Boy, if only he worked that hard on things in DC that ACTUALLY are important, we might get some things done. | |
|
|
See 10 replies to this post |
|
Prespd
join:2004-03-10
Wyoming, MI
2 edits | Take your fox off my TWC Ok, I'll admit, I'm no fan of the high rates I pay for my cable/internet from TWC. I chose to pay what I pay because I enjoy the programs I watch and the speed I get.
So I was intrigued when I saw this dispute. Based upon my geography, San Diego, and according to TWC, I would potentially lose these channels:
* Fox Reality Channel
* Fox Soccer Channel
* Fox Sports World Espanol
* Fuel
* FX
* Speed Channel
(Holy Crap, this makes me want to demand ala cart channels if I back TWC on this)
For all intents and purposes, I think FOX should be punished for putting such drivel on the air in the first place. I won't miss a single channel from FOX, and while I'm not applauding TWC, FOX can take their crap and shill it somewhere else.
People say it's a slippery slope when these broadcasters can ask for fees and still fill some 30-40% of programming time with shit commercials. Then everyone will try to "double dip"
So to you FOX, take your $1/subscriber and shove it up your ass. And to TWC, thanks for the free speed upgrades a while back, but come on, should I really be paying upwards of $130/month for my services?
Shame on TWC, but bigger shame on FOX, so I this time I go with the lesser of two evils. That being said, I'm fairly happy with TWC, even if technically I'm being ripped off.
And last to Sen Kerry. Get to work you lazy rich ass shill yourself. Don't worry about football. You've got more important things to do. But of course you're so disconnected from reaility you don't even know it. Dumb ass. This is why you lost to a moron none the less. | |
|
| | | Re: Take your fox off my TWC "I think FOX should be punished for putting such drivel on the air in the first place...Shame on TWC, but bigger shame on FOX..."
Biggest shame on YOU for suggesting any censure, restriction or oppression of our fundamental right to free speech protected by our constitution!!! Regardless of our agreement with the content on the Fox network, we should all find alarm by anti-free speech rhetoric and stand uniformly to protect that which makes our constitution unique.
I am certain that I share some of your frustrations, but restricting free speech is NOT the right course of action to suggest...elect someone else, choose another provider, start your own video distribution service, create your own news channel, etc. | |
|
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
| | "American tradition"? There's football on TV? ...on January 1st? OK, well, I guess they need something to fill the time between commercials.
Happy New Year! | |
|
|
See 17 replies to this post |
|
 joakoPremium
join:2000-09-07
/dev/null
kudos:5 | Is this real news... ...or did our country run out of real issues that affect peoples lives so we decided to start worrying about silly things?
--
PRescott7-2097 | |
|
| | | Re: Is this real news... Good comment. Cincinnati (TWC territory) vs. Florida (who wants to be against Tim Tebow unless you're a fan of another SEC school; Brighthouse territory, who let's TWC do their negotiations). Ohio vs. Florida - Kerry gets his wish - hmmm... two very big swing states. Yes, do it for the good of football. Oh yeah, Kerry isn't a fan of Fox anything (including the Wall Street Journal).
Remember Dora the Explorer crying last year? This one is precedent setting. It's actually quite important.
The unintended consequence is that we all get a la carte as a result. Hurts both TWC and News Corp. | |
|
| | Content or Keeping you Dumb? Actually, do you really think this is about us? This is about keeping us under control with content. More people know about Football and American Idol than they know about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The government wants to keep it that way. less people protesting about the crap corporations and the government pull if your kept busy with mindless shows. I predict in the not so long future as cable becomes more and more expensive and people are not able to afford it as much that the government will intervene to make sure you are kept dumb and happy. | |
|
EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | ...what? What the heck is John Kerry doing here? Is there now a fundamental right to football? Really?
Does Time Warner Cable even do business in Massachusetts? I thought it was mostly Comcast in the east and Charter out west. | |
|
| | | Re: ...what? Yep, they service a few towns out in the western part of the state (parts of Berkshire and Franklin counties). | |
|
|  kpc
@optonline.net | He is the chair of the Commerce Committee's subcommittee on communications. His committee has oversight on issues like this.
The fact is that Fox's channels affected by this are OTA therefore they are regulated. The cable companies are basically monopolies in their area, so the FCC regulates them as well. | |
|
| BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by EPS:What the heck is John Kerry doing here? Is there now a fundamental right to football? Really? I'd say if I lived in a city or state that took MILLIONS of my tax $$$ to pay for nice shiny new stadium so that owners can continue to make millions or billions then yes I think I am entitled. | |
|
Reviews:
 ·ProLog
·Verizon Online DSL
 ·voip.ms
1 edit | Make Fox the poster child for Ala Carte A lot has been said about letting viewers pay for the channels they want to receive. OK lets stop cutting bait and get to fishing:
TWC: make Fox an add on service ( I purposely did not use the premium word here), charge $1.00 for it and then those who want the drivel from Fox can pay for it. Those who do not, walk away.
--
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits. | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
 morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000 | A la carte! A la carte! Everyone: demand a la carte and this won't be an issue in the future! | |
|
|
1 edit | Re: A la carte! A la carte! I am certainly with you on this one. Let the people decide if they want it and want to pay the Fox Fee.
Let the value of the Fox channels be truly determined in an open free market that the corporations want. (Oh, you mean they dont really want that when it doesnt benefit them?)
Every negotiation from this day forward should simply be:
Content Owners: We want $3 per subscriber.
Content Deliverers: Absolutely, those that choose to subscribe to your channels we will pay you $3 for.
Content Owners: No, we want it in the basic package and all basic subscribers are counted towards the $3.
Content Deliverers: NO, those that ELECT to subscribe to your channels we will pay you $3 for. Now sign here or leave. | |
|
| | EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | Re: A la carte! A la carte! And when they say "sign here or leave", then the content owners will go to the people, just like Fox has here. | |
|
| | | | | Re: A la carte! A la carte! I've haven't really seen anything from Fox so far, In fact the only thing I saw was the Time Warner "Ransom Note" ad for their Roll over or get tough site.
And this is nothing compared to what Viacom was doing during their negotiations. Like the "Why is Dora Crying" ad (Example can be found at »greenscreencinema.com/article.ph···30404798) or the message crawls all over their channels 6 hours before the deadline to call your cable company to complain.
--
Frankly, I no longer fear Hell anymore, because I know Satan will just put me in my old office and proceed to unleash an unending barrage of stupidity towards me. | |
|
| |  PathfinderDazed ConfusedPremium
join:2000-03-26
Mount Vernon, NY
·RoadRunner Cable
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by Skippy25:I am certainly with you on this one. Let the people decide if they want it and want to pay the Fox Fee. Let the value of the Fox channels be truly determined in an open free market that the corporations want. (Oh, you mean they dont really want that when it doesnt benefit them?) Every negotiation from this day forward should simply be: Content Owners: We want $3 per subscriber. Content Deliverers: Absolutely, those that choose to subscribe to your channels will pay us $5.00 for it and we will give you $3.00Content Owners: No, we want it in the basic package and all basic subscribers are counted towards the $3. Content Deliverers: NO, those that ELECT to subscribe to your channels we will pay you $3 for. Now sign here or leave. Fixed | |
|
 VanPremium
join:2009-07-08
New Orleans, LA | It's funny to see people sticking up for the corporations screwing the people strictly because of the political affiliation of the man doing so | |
|
| kpc
@optonline.net | Re: It's funny to see people sticking up So true. I assume they had no problem with the same action in 2007 when Inoye (D, HI) and Stevens(R, AK) asked for the same thing - when they were chair and ranking member of the same Commerce committee. | |
|
 Woody79_00I run Linux am I still a PC?Premium
join:2004-07-08
united state | News Corp is greedy News Corp is a bunch of greedy morons
They want to deindex their stuff from Google and go to subscription news...which of course I hope they do, Murdoch can go down in history as the man who killed the newspaper.
It seems like these clowns just don't get it.
The cable companies(as much as they suck) are paying out of their own pockets to delivery News Corps stuff...Newscorp still wants money even though they don't pay one red cent for the cable lines to the users house
TWC should just drop their rear end all together with no arguments....Fos is a joke anymore anyways
--
My Blog | |
|
 maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1 | Goodbye NFL Sundays on Fox. Ah well, wasn't watching NFL anyways. | |
|
| BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Goodbye NFL Sundays on Fox. said by maartena:Ah well, wasn't watching NFL anyways. You can get Fox NFL over antenna. | |
|
| | Wrong way TWC is being colossally douchey and Kerry warns News Corp? | |
|
|
| |
| | | | Re: It's not Just TWC vs FOX The same thing is happening in my area. Our local Sinclair/Fox station is constantly running a crawl at the bottom of the screen reminding Mediacom customers that they're going to lose the station effective tomorrow. Meanwhile, Dish Network is being opportunistic by running big ads telling people that they will NOT lose the channel. | |
|
 james
join:2001-02-26
CWCville USA | Wow We're at fucking war and in a recession. He seriously feels football is an important enough issue for him to get involved in? What an asshat.
--
[BQUOTE=[user=Metatron2008]]But people who download thousands of movies and games.... Yes, they are as bad as any murderer[/BQUOTE] | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
| | Let Fox go dark. I'm a TWC customer, and wouldn't miss Fox a bit. Let TWC drop them for good. Their programming puts me to sleep, and their news channel sure isn't what I call news.
Unfortunately I don't see Fox being dropped from TWC for any more than a few hours. With TWC being the major cable operator in the Los Angeles area and New York City, the media execs just won't let it happen. | |
|
| |  I'm with Time Warner on this one
If this was a normal network-carrier fee negotiation, I wouldn't care, but for the first time in broadcast TV history, a content company (Fox), is wanting to charge the carrier (Time Warner) a fee per subscriber for a over the air BROADCAST station (Fox). This is unprecedented; they're essentially charging Time Warner for the privilege of putting up an antenna and feeding the free OTA feed over their HFC network.
This means that every Time Warner customer is paying for a station that everyone else receives for free. Do you understand the precedent that sets? They are double dipping, and the FCC HAS to step in.
I wouldn't mind paying $1 for Fox... but I expect no advertisements in exchange for my money upfront. That's the whole point of advertisement supported TV. | |
|
| dforan
join:2000-12-09
Willoughby, OH Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
| Re: I'm with Time Warner on this one Sort of me tooo... Why do we pay Time Warner for service and there is a TON of infomercials AKA we are paying TOP FRIGGIN dollars for ADVERTISING.. Maybe Fox needs to look at their line up... Also, for the most part DROP it
I do not need Fox Espanol of FOX ENglish Soccer and as I look the only really see FX and Speed... I do not even get the rest of the useless crap | |
|
| | | I don't think this is a first... the local OTA ABC affiliate and Dish had this debate about a year ago in my town... | |
|
| | I must live in the wrong area Sudden-stink and our NBC affiliate went through a retransmission fee fight a couple of years ago and Uncle Sam cared not. KRBC was pulled from the cable station for a few months. | |
|
| | | Re: I must live in the wrong area had the same thing happen with dish and krcg {cbs}a couple of years ago.wouldn't have cared except for football.no point in watching thier news. | |
|
| |
|
|
·
·
·
Obvious why Kerry against Fox & for TWC
