how-to block ads
|
-
jmoz2989
join:2008-02-01
Moscow, PA
 ·Adams CATV
| reply to cypherstream
Re: Wasteful Channel Lineup means fewer HD Channels?
Comcast recently took over a 500 Mhz system in Eagles Mere and Northumberland, PA. The company that ran these systems was Commuter Cable, like a lot of the rural providers in northern PA, they never invested in network upgrades for extra services. So now Comcast has a system with no digital cable infrastructure, HSI or digital voice solution. This is one system that Comcast has to sell off to Blue Ridge or Metrocast which already have a presence in that area. Otherwise none of these older Adelphia systems or ones in southeast PA will never be up to par, due to Comcast purchasing these legacy systems and experimenting with things like targeted advertising. | |
cypherstream
Looking forward to the future of things.
Premium,MVM
join:2004-12-02
Reading, PA
clubs:
2 edits | reply to IPPlanMan
Well one of Comcast's biggest mistakes was purchasing systems that were only 750 MHz and lower. My area was upgraded by Time Warner and then AT&T took over. Comcast aquired it from AT&T, so Comcast was not responsible for the quality of the system and capacity. Comcast is stuck with old adelphia systems many which were neglected.
It's just so overwhelming for Comcast to upgrade all of the infrastructure because they are just too huge. They will crumble if they don't start selling some of these systems off to someone who WILL upgrade it, or if they don't upgrade themselves.
In my area we have a small MSO called Service Electric Cablevision. They were not afraid to upgrade their 750 MHz Magnavox system to an 870 MHz C-Cor system. They spent the money, upgraded the system right, and now offer more HD channels than Comcast. They are a smaller lesser known MSO also! Then there's Blue Ridge Cable in Northeast PA, and also in Ephrata PA. Ever hear of them? Probably not, but they have more HD than Comcast and are also on an 870 MHz SA Gainmaker system.
The little guys will upgrade their networks because it's easier for them to manage. The big guys like Time Warner, Cox, Charter will upgrade as well, but Comcast on the other hand has their funds tied up in stuff like addressable advertising and paying their top heavy corporate structure. Maybe an MSO that has a GM, small board of directors and an Owner/Operator has less costs than one that has 50 GM's, 200 board of directors, and overly paid VP's, CFO's, and CEO, along with grounds maintenance and energy for 100's of headends, rather than the small guy with only 3 headends.
When you have something so huge and heavy, it's harder to lift isn't it? | |
IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman
join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
2 edits | reply to IPPlanMan
Thank you all for the very helpful information....
From the numbers that you're giving Cypherstream, and I'm not sure what kind of system DC runs on, but it appears that the number of HD Channels is significantly limited compared to competing Satellite systems, and it also appears that we'll be stuck with 3:1 compression for HD Channels for a long long time... Furthermore, it also appears that we'll be stuck with the data speeds we have for a long time too...
I've noticed that it's been awhile since Comcast D.C. added new HD channels. We're lacking FX HD, Bravo HD, Fox News HD, IFC HD, CNBC HD.... among others.
I'm not sure what the holdup is on those additional channels... anyone have thoughts on that? Is it a lack of available bandwidth or something else?
--
"We're going to start at one end of (Fallujah), and we're not going to stop until we get to the other. If there's anybody left when that happens, we're going to turn around and we're going to go back and finish it."
Lt. Col. Pete Newell: 1st Inf. US Army | |
|
