|
|
Post by MasterFX1 on Sept 23, 2004 12:34:44 GMT -5
How many other privately owned CBS stations aren't providing HD for cable subscribers? The majority of them. CBS affiliates have the highest rate of "No HD Cable Deal" out of all the network affiliates. Just the facts. I still voted for "Both WRGB and TWC." |
|
|
|
Post by OldMatador on Sept 23, 2004 12:50:22 GMT -5
The majority of them. CBS affiliates have the highest rate of "No HD Cable Deal" out of all the network affiliates. Just the facts. I still voted for "Both WRGB and TWC." We should take both parties, lock them in a room and them force them to read this thread... Or get a bunch of angry llamas in there... Angry llamas always work. Sadly, we are a minority so minute, it's not a priority. I hope this attitude will change soon. |
|
|
|
Post by MasterFX1 on Sept 23, 2004 13:22:39 GMT -5
Sadly, we are a minority so minute, it's not a priority. I hope this attitude will change soon. This is a huge point as to why these two are not coming to terms already. There is no system in place to measure the HD ratings in the market. Watching a channel in HD has zero effect on the nielson ratings system, which is what is used to determine advertising rates. So if it does not affect the ratings, it does not affect revenue. ...And if does not affect revenue or ratings, why should either WRGB or TWC give a crap? Of course they need to pretend they give a crap for Public Relation's sake. As a side-bar effort, you many want to campaign for a way to measure HDTV penetration (heh heh, that's the proper term) in our market, as well as HD ratings. The only numbers out there for our area is what TWC says is the number of HD STB's they have deployed. And knowing how that game works, the numbers are probably not that accurate. There's really no way to check. If these stats could be obtained, once the demographics warranted, the advertisers themselves would demand that a deal get done. At that point you would see a quicker response and a greater concern for the whole HD movement. |
|
|
|
Post by Hootster413 on Sept 23, 2004 16:08:45 GMT -5
MasterFx makes a good point. The networks are producing many of their new fall prime time shows in HD. Most of the cable and dish providers are also "hawking" HD service as well. They would not be doing that now to meet an FCC deadline that now looks like it's slipping out to 2009 unless there is something in it for them!!! There's a growing market for HD and it will be marketed to advertisers as such. NBC kind of failed with their Olympics HD feed in that they only had two ads - Sony and Sony. From an article I read on News.com last week, one of measures being tracked is how many HDTVs are being sold. As the price of sets comes down and information on exactly what HDTV is I think demand for content will explode. To that point, TWC knows exactly how many folks subscribe to HD service so they know how much they stand to win or lose on a deal with WRGB. I guess I would recommend that you all keep asking TWC to add WRGB-DT. The downside is that TWC might add it into a premium tier that you have to pay extra for.
|
|
|
|
Post by OldMatador on Sept 23, 2004 16:15:39 GMT -5
The downside is that TWC might add it into a premium tier that you have to pay extra for. I cannot see any scenario that would lead CBS to be added to the HD Pay Tier of TWC. If CBS is added, NBC, ABC and FOX will have to follow suit. |
|
|
|
Post by zekmoe on Sept 25, 2004 13:05:16 GMT -5
WRGB in my opinion. Simply get over it. Rebroadcasting HDTV is not an Added Value service. Swallow the expense. I wonder if when Color came into play 50 years ago would the average household paid more to watch in color than black and white? Doubtfull...
Bob
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaggs on Sept 26, 2004 20:43:56 GMT -5
Take a look at the propaganda that the networks are distributing concerning "FREE HDTV". This sounds like the commercial WRGB aired in the weeks preceeding the Superbowl. Here's the website: www.myfreehdtv.com"FREE" means buying an OTA STB ($250-$500) plus an antenna ($30+/-). In my view, "Free" was when I took the cable box I already had and exchanged it for the HD version at no cost. Proponents of the Local Television Broadcaster's "MYFREEHDTV" site would say that I am paying for the cable box, but I say I am going to pay anyways because I want the good reception without having to fiddle with an antenna. The site also supports Multicasting, which weakens the OTA HD signal. |
|
