Why Faux

[Chuck from FOX]

Let me start out by saying this is my first post.  My name is Chuck and I'm the GM of FOX 6 in Milwaukee.  I have been on your site often and am impressed by the depth of content and knowledge of your users.  In fact, I know at one point we were able to reach out to you guys to help us w/ our coverage area way back in the 'old days'.  I've searched a few other cities and have not found a site/group as robust as yours.

One question - I see that we can still be referred to as Faux 6 and I wonder if that is a reference back to the days when we were low power digital.  I assume you guys know that we've put a lot of money into our facilities since then (and will be again this summer).  Either way, we made it to the analog cutoff (actually, we were asked by the FCC to be a nightlight station so my analog is still on the air for a bit longer).

Chuck

[Matt Heebner]

I can only speak for myself, but I stopped with the whole FAUX thing when you guys stopped the 480p broadcasts to go to true HD  (especially football!!).

I for one am hoping you guys go to HD soon for your news. TMJ's looks pretty good, but  I still prefer my news from FOX.

[Matt Heebner]

Oh, and welcome to MilwaukeeHDTV.org. !!!

[Gregg Lengling]

Let me start out by saying this is my first post.  My name is Chuck and I'm the GM of FOX 6 in Milwaukee.  I have been on your site often and am impressed by the depth of content and knowledge of your users.  In fact, I know at one point we were able to reach out to you guys to help us w/ our coverage area way back in the 'old days'.  I've searched a few other cities and have not found a site/group as robust as yours.

One question - I see that we can still be referred to as Faux 6 and I wonder if that is a reference back to the days when we were low power digital.  I assume you guys know that we've put a lot of money into our facilities since then (and will be again this summer).  Either way, we made it to the analog cutoff (actually, we were asked by the FCC to be a nightlight station so my analog is still on the air for a bit longer).

Chuck

Chuck you are correct and I may have helped perpetrate it.  I live in Cedarburg and back when you were running extremely low power from your studio tower it was aggravating for me even with an 8 bay bow tie on my tower.  Channel 12 would come on late in the day and you were history.  Thankfully I'm glad that was eventually resolved.  Even though I get cable/satellite/iptv as options at home my local viewing is done OTA so I don't have to deal with compression rates.  I only hope that you don't go down the slipperly slope of compressing your HD streams to offer a bazzillion extra subchannels.  


Any how at this time I should say you guys are Fox6 again (of course you are probably being flooded by complaints no one can listen to the news broadcasts on their car radios any more).

[LoadStar]

I don't have much to contribute to the topic at hand, having never referred to Fox 6 that way... (Faux News, perhaps, but that's a different channel. )

That said - welcome! We'd love it if you could stick around!

[Chuck from FOX]

Our bandwidth for the network wouldn't every really change that much.  We are testing a signal on 6.2 right now - a simple broadcast of our Doppler 6000....

[SRW1000]

Chuck,

Thank you very much for joining the forum and posting here.  It's good to know that you're listening to us, and we appreciate hearing your point of view, even if we may not agree with it.

I have to say that I'm one of the people that is disappointed to see that you're testing the multicasting waters.  You're correct that FOX's HD programming would not be as affected as some of the other stations because their HD isn't transmitted at as high of a rate as the other networks.

That said, many of us here are purists.  We have been enamored with HD technology long before it was even broadcast here.  We were the early adopters and the evangelists that spread the word to our friends and coworkers.  We are passionate about our HD.

With that in mind, many are very skeptical as to the benefits of multicasting to your viewers.  During the daytime, with SD programming - fantastic; use those subchannels.  But, for HD programming, we want the best picture and sound presentation possible.  We've waited too long for the promise of HD, only to see it compromised just to provide some marginal or advertising-based content, as is being done by some of your competitors.

Again, thanks for taking the time to read and post here, we really do appreciate your participation.

Scott

[techguy1975]

Can't say anything that hasn't been said already.  Thanks for posting here Chuck.  I believe alot of of the Faux news comments were referring to your low power days.. That has changed for which I'm sure alot of people are glad

[Chuck from FOX]

Scott:

Thanks for your honest comments.  I need to say first that I am NOT an engineer....really, a salesman by trade.  But, ironically, I did have a conversation w/ my Chief tonight and we were talking about bandwidth for FOX HD - this is the only reason I really able to weigh in on the subject w/ any clarity.

I'm happy to answer questions you or your fellow posters have about the station.  I understand your position and the fact that your are a purist....I respect it - but the reality is our business model for OTA TV is broken and the latest economic troubles have accelerated the time line.  Sub channels work from a business perspective only if they make money - you personally may not appreciate the programming, but others might.  But let's not forget that we are a business that needs to pay the bills every month.

Bottom line - our entire industry needs to re-event itself if we are going to be able to give you the HD programming you want.

We've already spent millions at the station - I won't talk down to you about that - I'm sure you are tired of hearing about how much we've had to spend...but the reality is it is true....it's also true that at some point our technology was going to have to be upgraded - digital is simply the way technology is going (but I will say my analog transmitter, antenna, line, etc was working just fine).

But we've made it into the new world - my engineers have done an amazing job rebuilding the station from the ground up (technologically speaking).  We've got some more tower work to do this summer as we put a new antenna up at over 1000 feet and then we will have our infrastructure set.  The signal is strong and crystal clear and we've never looked better.  All because of digital.

Chuck

[Bluto]

Welcome aboard, Chuck.  I must say, you are my preferred local channel for news.  I'm watching Vince right now.  Two questions:

1.  Any timeline on when your newscasts go HD?  Even you start out HD in-studio only, that will count for me.
2.  What are the near-term and long-term plans for the new 6-2 channel?

Thanks!

[SRW1000]

Thanks for the reply, Chuck.

Please understand that we're happy and grateful for all the upgrades that were made in order to allow us to get our HD programming.  Lots of money and manhours were needed to get to where you are today, and we like it.

At the same time, we've also invested lots of money in equipment and time in mounting antennas, running cable, etc.  Now, most of us have only invested thousands or tens of thousands of dollars and tens to hundreds of hours, but proportionally, we've all put lots into getting us to where we are today.

The OTA model is going to have to change.  I can't pretend to know the business decisions you have to face on a daily business, although many of us are going through the same process in our own professions.  The challenge is to find a way to keep everyone happy, while also making enough money to keep going.  That won't be easy, and it will call for some very creative thinking and planning.  Things that used to work will have to be left behind and new ways of increasing revenue and viewership will have to be invented.

We want you to make money.

If there's anything that we can do to help you along, or bounce ideas off of, either in public or in private, please consider us as a resource.

One thing that I've been wondering:  With the growing interest in multicasting, would it be possible for a couple of stations to operate as a joint venture, with the intent of operating a new channel that could offer shared bandwidth for multiple SD channels?  That way, HD programming could be left untouched, while additional channels could be broadcast.  Yes, this would increase costs, since a new broadcasting system would have to be used, but it would create a new revenue stream,  and those additional costs could be split.

One last request:  Any hints about if or when we might see some local HD news?

Thanks again for your participation,

Scott

[Chuck from FOX]

Both are great questions - our business is very very competitive - so I can't answer either of them.  Stay tuned - that's the best I can say.

[Tom Snyder]

Hey Chuck!

Welcome to our community. I know we've spoken a few times, and I've been happy to be a conduit to get information from you to the group on several occasions. Happy that you've made the decision to jump in.

You'll find (and actually probably already know) that the group is extremely passionate about High Definition... a sword that cuts both ways. I hope  that, now that you're here, you'll find a way to take advantage of that passion and allow us to be of service.

Thanks again for your participation.

[Bluto]

Both are great questions - our business is very very competitive - so I can't answer either of them.  Stay tuned - that's the best I can say.

Fair enough.  Can't blame a guy for trying, though.

[Steve Mann]

I wanted to welcome you too, Chuck. It's always great to have the stations involved with our group. On a baseball fan group, you'd be like the manager of the team signing up and joining in on the conversation.  Wouldn't that be fun!  

It's good to know that we are being not only heard, but also we're being useful.