Canada no Fed Push but stations are going.

[Gregg Lengling]

Why is it in Toronto they can go for it without being forced and down here we have to force stations to get on the air.  This is from a Toronto newspaper.

;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
A high-definition television could be sitting in your family room sooner than you think.

Despite the fact that digital programming is scarce for Canadian viewers and the cost of the set itself is still high, indications are the technology that can turn TV watching into a theatre-like experience is poised to enter prime time.

Last month, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission mandated new deadlines for manufacturers to include digital tuners in TV sets as another means to spur the changeover from analog technology. The U.S. has already given its broadcasters -- who already are offering some high-definition programming -- until 2006 to convert to digital signals.

Canada's federal broadcast regulator has instituted no such guidelines, saying it prefers to let the market dictate. But both Global Television and CHUM Ltd. have applied for digital-broadcasting licences in Toronto.

John O'Connor, vice-president of western operations for Global Television, says the company will introduce digital programming in the Toronto area as early as next year, with no time frame for a Vancouver launch. O'Connor said the cost of switching to high-definition is in the millions of dollars per station, both in broadcast infrastructure and studio re-design, but allowed there is a risk in taking a conservative approach.

"Sooner or later the next consumer wave will be the high-def television," he said. "It hasn't happened at this point because the content had to be there to advertise the product. It's a predicament for Canadian broadcasters to know how to move forward and avoid the capital risk."

In Greater Vancouver, high definition programming is available via satellite and cable, but the consumer is faced with the extra cost of a digital decoder and -- depending on the service -- an extra monthly fee.

Despite the dearth of programs available to Canadians, sales of HD-capable TVs have begun to take off because of the incredible adoption rate of DVD players, says Ken Elsey, vice-president of the Consumer Electronics Marketers Council, which represents Canadian industry players.

"The growth in DVD player sales has been phenomenal and it's driving the sales of HDTV along with it," said Elsey.

Elsey said that since the DVD player hit the market in Canada in 1997 (and sold 30,000 units) a total of 3.41 million have been sold, including an estimated 1.4 million this year. It's been estimated that 35 per cent of Canadian households own a DVD player.

DVD prices drops and the crisp, clear audio and video experience of the technology have captivated consumers.

HDTV buyers are falling for the same thing, says Gordon Chang, video manager for Vancouver electronics store A&B Sound.

"Once you see the HDTV signal, you are hooked," he says. "I get two channels and I'll watch anything. Once there is (more) high-def content, it's going to be nuts."

Chang wouldn't release sales figures on HDTV, but said that 90-95 per cent of A&B's stock of projection (large screen) TVs are high-definition this year, up from 40-45 per cent last year.

He said that the average price drop on similar HDTVs from last year was about $500.

An entry level HDTV is about $2,500.

HDTV - The Big Picture


------------------
Gregg R. Lengling
RCA P61310 61" 16x9
glengling@ameritech.net

[Paul Bethke]

Thanks for the article, Gregg.

Amazing, isn't it?

I would attempt to answer your "Why" with "because they're doing it better". They're going about it the "American" way - letting market forces drive the market. There may be a bit of competition mixed in as it is probably easy to receive American stations from Buffalo or other markets just across the border/lake.

So then what is America doing? Imagine having government dictate what TV technology broadcasters *must* use. Wait a second - "government dictate"? What kind of country are we living in? Hmmm.

How long might it be before government starts dictating not only what technology to use, but perhaps what programming to show - or not to show. Ooh - WAY off topic, sorry.

I am frequently amused at the postings on this site being angry and even irate about "X" station not meeting FCC deadlines. Or that station "Y" doesn't care one iota about its customers.

So what? That's what free enterprise is about. If a station chooses not to go the HDTV route, they will have to live with the consequences of that decision.

What if we flipped your question around... Seeing the Toronto example that market pressure alone can cause the adoption of HDTV, why should the government have to *force* broadcasters to switch? It shouldn't - in my opinion.

I applaud the efforts of those members here who contact the local stations and voice your opinion. That's market pressure and hopefully they will hear you now and start thinking digital. The local stations will also begin to feel pressure from their network parents, who invest heavily into HD production and expect it to be available to their viewers. And next it will be the advertisers turn to apply pressure.

Perhaps it's just me. I have been an "early adopter" through quite a few new technoligies in the past. Maybe I've been tempered by time - learning to be excited about the neat things I am able to do and show *now*, and knowing that the rest of the world will catch up, eventually. It's my choice to be on the bleeding edge. That has consequences of its own.

Ok, I have a nifty new TV - it can display HDTV. Not many of the local stations are showing HD signals yet. So what do I do? When I wish to watch TV, I check out the Digital stations first. HDNet, HDHBO, HDShowtime, Channel 58, Channel 4. If I can't find anything there, then I may throw in a DVD, or resign myself to watching a regular TV station. I invested some time and money into a better antenna to attempt reception of Madison or Chicago area stations. As the list of digital stations that I can receive grows, there will be more and more reasons for me not to make it down to "regular TV". In time the Regular TV stations (or their advertisers) will feel the crunch of not being watched. Then they will have to keep up or fall by the wayside. Their choice.

Life's too short. It's only TV. Wow! Now I sound old...

My two cents. Thanks for listening.

Paul

[Kevin Arnold]

I usually agree with that approach Paul, but with this situation there is one significant difference I feel changes the rules. Usually the marketplace can decide quite nicely what format, method, or approach is the best, such as with the VHS-Betamax wars. Ironically here the lesser system won. With CD's, DVD's and computers I have no problem.
With broadcast TV there is the issue of spectum. There's a very limited quantity, and it must be rationed. In order for the owners to get the biggest use out of allowing broadcasters to camp on this spectrum. In the early days of tv the FCC decided via the NTSC what tv system would be used. When color came in the early 50's if market forces were allowed we would have had 2 systems: CBS with their rich color, low resolution, spinning metal disk system and the current RCA backwards compatible system. The last time the FCC let the market decide we had four non compatible am stereo systems, none of which ever went any where. So when it comes time to upgrade the old NTSC system, I see no viable way to do it without someone making the decision-and the FCC is the someone.
Broadcasters by their very nature would not change a thing because it costs money. Without intervention the analog system would be around unchanged for another 50 years. Of course there will be a lot to teeth gnashing and screaming but this is almost pro-forma. The only mistake I see is that the FCC eased off and allowed the current mess to generate.
To put it another way-as long as you're using the public airwaves to generate your income, you have to follow the rules. The compalining you hear is nothing more than the lease holders trying to enforce their contract they thought they had.

[ReesR]

bravo

[Gregg Lengling]

Yes the FCC did make a mandate of 8VSB for the transmission method in the US.  But the same holds true for Canada.  The broadcasters up there have to use the 8VSB formula (mainly to make the universal TV's for the NA market), but the Canadian stations aren't given a free new channel and forced with a deadline.  They were given free reign to decide if they want to go that route.  What we see in the article that a number of stations have decided that the market (read viewers) want HDTV and they have reacted by filing for licenses and constructing facilities.  At least some broadcasters get the message that we want HDTV.....I just hope some of their US counterparts get the message.