Milwaukee HDTV User Group

HDTV Forums => Milwaukee HDTV Programming => Topic started by: madsdad on Tuesday Oct 16, 2007, 08:47:04 PM

Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: madsdad on Tuesday Oct 16, 2007, 08:47:04 PM
I live in Kenosha and am a DIRECTV subscriber.  Channel 58 is not part of DirectTV HD programming.  Why?  I am sure someone here can tell me and would appreciate it.  But what I would appreciate more is talking to the person within the CBS 58 organization is responsible for denying ALL requests for FCC waivers for ANY reason.

By this I mean since I can get CBS 58 over the air, as well as CBS 2 from Chicago in OTA High Def, but wanted to not have to set up an antenna, I can request an FCC waiver through DIRECTV to the local affiliate and then the local affiliate must approve it.  If they do then DIRECTV can provide me with an alternate CBS in High Def.    But as I said CBS 58 will not approve the waiver.  

In another related matter can someone explain to me why if I was to subscribe to Time Warner cable TV in Kenosha I could obtain standard definition affiliates from both Milwaukee and Chicago?  But DIRECTV can not offer me this.  I can only get Milwaukee locals.  Oh and by the way after I figure out why channel 58 won't sign off on the waiver  I also have to find out why channel 2 in Chicago must wave it as well.

Thanks in advance

Newbie

Mark
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: gparris on Tuesday Oct 16, 2007, 09:09:49 PM
CBS58HD doesn't want to work out an agreement with Directv for carriage along with the ABC, NBC and FOX affiliates in Milwaukee that DO from what I understand:
My guess is that CBS58 thinks it is "special" (or something).:rolleyes:

We don't get CW18HD either, nor PBSHD, but CWHD is more important to some than others for network programming (like me) and when Directv11 goes up, there will be more capacity than ever for HD locals, so this contract agreement thing will happen once again and CBS58HD will have to bend, hopefully.

Note that there are even newer model H21 and HR21 Directv boxes out there than do not even offer OTA integration,
so Directv must be planning on eventually offering every HD channel that is available.
As for me, I live on a hill surrounded by houses in Pleasant Prairie, so OTA presents a problem and the Chicagoland stations on Directv would be perfect.

TWC has a grandfather clause for Kenosha County to be able to offer the analogue-only Chicago stations;
once they go dark in 2009, all that will left is digital stations and this clause will evaporate.

Now, if only Directv and the federal government allowed Kenosha County residences a blanket waiver altogether (or made the county part of the Chicago DMA) since we are at times, more Chicagolanders than Milwaukeeans to begin with,  what with all of the newbies from Lake and Cook County, Illinois moving here.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: vegasvic on Tuesday Oct 16, 2007, 09:41:19 PM
Channel 58 was also the last local station to come to an agreement when DTV started offering SD locals a few years back.

You would think a struggling station would do whatever they could to reach a deal but the high school a/v kids who run that place (Weigel) have been pretty much clueless since they've been on the air.

With all the other choices out there, especially in HD I simply don't bother ever watching them.  And when they carry a football game I want to watch like last Sundays Cowgirls/Cheetahs game I just watch the Sunday Ticket feed.  My eyeballs will never view a Channel 58 commercial.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: HDefinicktion on Wednesday Oct 17, 2007, 06:47:59 AM
There must be someone new looking through these waivers, I was able to get mine passed.  I am hooked into the New York Ch 80 feed.  I have the OTA feed as well, but if I was unable to get it, I think I would just pass it by.  There is not much of interest to me on there anyway....
Title: DTV vs. WDJT
Post by: hop on Tuesday Oct 23, 2007, 12:55:49 PM
HDefiniktion,

How recently were you granted a waiver?  Was if from Chicago (WBBN) or Milwaukee (WDJT).  I went aroind and around with them about 9 months ago and was denied by both.  I live in Pleasant Prairie (Kenosha).

I simply indicated to the station manager at WDJT that all three viewers in my household would boycott 58, and we have.  Short of CBS getting the Super Bowl back or some other equally as enticing an event, I don't plant to view.

Hop
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: AndrewP on Tuesday Oct 23, 2007, 01:03:51 PM
Common, in Kenosha with ChannelMaster 4228 unless in the forest area, there is no big deal to get Milwaukee and Chicago OTA.
I get it in Muskego with antenna in the attic.
Just spend $40 at Marmax and you are set for years, maybe for life:D
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: HDefinicktion on Tuesday Oct 23, 2007, 03:18:18 PM
I got my waiver around the beginning of last years football season....from CBS58.  I wanted to catch some of the games on the east coast.  With Fox and CBS on the east coast, it is usually around three extra games a week that I can get without Sunday Ticket.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Tom Snyder on Tuesday Oct 23, 2007, 09:40:05 PM
I'm thinking you're lucky that Jim Hall flunked geography. He gave you a waiver, but he refused mine, and you're only 3 miles further away from the 58 tower than I am.:rolleyes:
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: bubbaridesfast on Wednesday Oct 24, 2007, 02:04:22 PM
I thought one was only eligible for a waiver if you could not receive satisfactory reception of an SD signal. I don't think waivers have anything to do with HD. Although, I would think if you can receive the SD signal you could also receive the HD OTA.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: COMET on Friday Oct 26, 2007, 12:41:01 AM
I have had a waiver for over 2 years. I am in West Bend, I could not get  58 OTA at the time I requested the waiver. Now OTA works fine, but I still get 80. At first I had channels 80 and 81, but they took 81 away. I still get 380 and 381. Shows up $2.25 on my bill. Between channels 6,58,80,88 it can almost be like having SUnday Ticket.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: bubbaridesfast on Friday Oct 26, 2007, 09:05:12 AM
$2.25 Fee? I have a waiver for Fox and get channel 88 but there is no fee, although I would pay $2.25 to get CBS in HD from the sat.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: COMET on Friday Oct 26, 2007, 09:20:01 AM
This is what my bill looks like
10/10   11/09   TOTAL CHOICE PLUS Monthly     51.99  
 
10/10   11/09   HD Access Monthly     9.99  
 
10/10   11/09   Network: CBS HD Monthly     0.00  
 
10/10   11/09   Network: FOX HD Monthly     0.00  
 
10/10   11/09   Network: CBS from NYC/LA Monthly     2.25  
 
10/10   11/09   DIRECTV DVR Service Monthly     5.99
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: brewguru on Monday Nov 05, 2007, 01:33:00 PM
I e-mailed Ch. 58 today to find out what, if anything, is going on. I was polite and respectful just asking for an update.

This is what they came back with:

"Directv and our corporate office have been in negotiations on and off for some time now.
We hope a resolution is forthcoming, however, we have not been given a timeline."
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: HDefinicktion on Monday Nov 05, 2007, 01:54:27 PM
I agree with you COMET on the Sunday Ticket comment, but I do not have that 2.25 charge on my bill.  I wonder why FOX does not have a charge?  Is that charge dictated by our local CBS?
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: vegasvic on Monday Nov 05, 2007, 10:09:10 PM
Quote from: brewguru;42136I e-mailed Ch. 58 today to find out what, if anything, is going on. I was polite and respectful just asking for an update.

This is what they came back with:

"Directv and our corporate office have been in negotiations on and off for some time now.
We hope a resolution is forthcoming, however, we have not been given a timeline."

The last time I emailed them it took a week for a response.  

I haven't watched a show on 58 in a long time.  I watched the Pats/Colts game yesterday on the Sunday Ticket channel :)
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: brewguru on Tuesday Nov 06, 2007, 11:56:07 AM
Yes, so did I. I'm so glad they don't black out the HiDef Channels like they did with the regular Sunday Ticket Package.

I think we all should flood her e-mail until something gets resolved with this. Her e-mail is: cgrotelueschen@cbs58.com . Her name is Christine and she's the office manager.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: steve053 on Tuesday Nov 06, 2007, 12:32:15 PM
Quote from: brewguru;42165......I think we all should flood her e-mail until something gets resolved with this. Her e-mail is: cgrotelueschen@cbs58.com . Her name is Christine and she's the office manager.

And e-mailing a secretary will accomplish what? :huh?:
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: brewguru on Wednesday Nov 07, 2007, 01:45:26 PM
I've worked in plenty of offices and sold to a lot of companies. Office managers (PC for secretary, yes) have more power than you would think. If she keeps getting e-mails like this, you think she's not going to tell anyone?
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: klwillis45 on Wednesday Nov 07, 2007, 01:56:26 PM
Why bother her if you know who's at the top. (I don't)
 It's not like the head honchos email addy will be tough to figure out. dboss@cbs58.com
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Jack 1000 on Friday Nov 09, 2007, 10:59:48 AM
Can you get at least a CBS national station on Direct TV?

Jack
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: gparris on Friday Nov 09, 2007, 11:11:23 AM
Some forum members here actually got "lucky" and get CBSHD in NYC, while most are disallowed for some insane reason.

I would think everyone should get waivers and then CBS58 would get its head on straight with Directv and get the HD signal to its subscribers/viewers.
CBSHD in NYC watching reduces the viewership CBS58 needs to sell to its advertisers and with waivers, it might create some push to negotiation on both sides to get it done.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Tom Snyder on Friday Nov 09, 2007, 12:47:55 PM
Jim Hall is where the buck stops at CBS58. He comes here often (Hi Jim :wave: ).  I'm not sticking up for him, just adding some perspective.

He knows that we're not happy that 58HD isn't on DirecTV. We can complain all we want, but there are other factors that we know nothing about that play into that negotiation that are eminently more important to his long term business strategy than doing a bad deal because we're complaining. He's simply executing his business plan and negotiating his carriage deal with DirecTV, and granting waivers hurts his negotiating position. Keep in mind that it's not just 58... it's also DirecTV...So it will happen when they come to a deal on terms that are acceptable to both parties.

In the article in today's Business Journal, he states that they're budgeting for HD local news. The deal will get done.. I'm guessing once DirecTV has the satellite bandwidth to carry all the Milwaukee area signals, we'll see 58 in HD (along with 41,49 and 63).

In the meantime, my little OTA antenna hidden on top of my media closet picks up 58 for me just fine.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: brewguru on Friday Nov 09, 2007, 01:46:19 PM
Tom,

With all the new HD channels on Direct TV, don't they have the bandwidth NOW to handle CBS HiDef? I mean, other cities have 4 (or more) local channels in HiDef so I don't think that's a valid excuse.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: vegasvic on Friday Nov 09, 2007, 02:01:37 PM
It's amazing that Channel 58 doesn't have it in their "business plan" to do a "bad deal".  4,6 and 12 (all much more successful than 58) have managed to be happy with the deal they struck with DTV.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Talos4 on Friday Nov 09, 2007, 03:50:54 PM
Quote from: brewguru;42287Tom,

With all the new HD channels on Direct TV, don't they have the bandwidth NOW to handle CBS HiDef? I mean, other cities have 4 (or more) local channels in HiDef so I don't think that's a valid excuse.

Actually the new HD channels are coming from the new bird Directv10,the majority of the coverage is CONUS. with many RNS's also included in it's coverage.  I believe there may be a smattering of LIL's thrown in, BUT!!! I'm not sure about that.  

D11 is scheduled to the workhorse for LIL's across the country.  It is scheduled to launch sometime in the first quarter of 08, likely sometime in January.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Tom Snyder on Friday Nov 09, 2007, 04:01:53 PM
Yeah.. the majority of new local HD will be coming from the new bird, but even now it's more than just making room for 58.

And as far as equality on the deals, 4, 6 and 12 don't each own a bunch of other lower power stations that they're trying to get D* to carry as a condition of the package. As I recall, that was one of the sticking points with 58 and TWC.  

I have no "insider" information, but I'd bet that 41,49 and 63 have something to do with it.  Until D* has spot beam capabilities to carry every digital channel in this market, I don't see Jim caving on 58 short term and hoping that they'll carry 41,49 and 63 when they have enough bandwidth. I think he's going all or nothing.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: vegasvic on Friday Nov 09, 2007, 07:28:30 PM
Quote from: Tom Snyder;42301Yeah.. the majority of new local HD will be coming from the new bird, but even now it's more than just making room for 58.

And as far as equality on the deals, 4, 6 and 12 don't each own a bunch of other lower power stations that they're trying to get D* to carry as a condition of the package. As I recall, that was one of the sticking points with 58 and TWC.  

I have no "insider" information, but I'd bet that 41,49 and 63 have something to do with it.  Until D* has spot beam capabilities to carry every digital channel in this market, I don't see Jim caving on 58 short term and hoping that they'll carry 41,49 and 63 when they have enough bandwidth. I think he's going all or nothing.

I think you're probably right.  What a waste.  Why not just have them carry 58 now and the rest next year.  He can't work out that deal?  Instead he holds out for 3 crappy channels no one cares about.  

But they are thinking about an HD newscast.  Maybe that will push their 10 p.m. news past The Simpsons reruns.  But I doubt it. Crappy programming in HD is still crappy programming.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: vegasvic on Saturday Nov 10, 2007, 08:56:05 AM
Why would Jim make  a stink about Channel 41 being in HD?  Three Stooges in HD? Bewitched? I Love Lucy?
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Blitzburgh on Saturday Nov 10, 2007, 05:51:47 PM
Quote from: vegasvic;42320Why would Jim make  a stink about Channel 41 being in HD?  Three Stooges in HD? Bewitched? I Love Lucy?

I think they are talking about having DTV carry them period.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: vegasvic on Saturday Nov 10, 2007, 11:58:35 PM
D already carries 41.
Title: Ch58
Post by: cigarsmkrwi on Monday Nov 12, 2007, 02:37:17 PM
Here is my two cents worth on this subject. The analog signal from CH58 on D*tv is of such low quality that it is hard to watch, I have issues with picking up CH58 HD broadcast from time to time because I'm using an outdoor antenna that has been on my house for 30 yrs. I only watch CH58 if the Packers happen to be on, which is twice this season. Otherwise I don't even know 58 is on the air. So in my opinion who cares if 58 is carried on D*tv or not.

That is my opinion, I could be wrong!
Title: Channel 58 HD discussion
Post by: BillC on Wednesday Nov 28, 2007, 09:00:25 PM
OK, folks, I am a newbie here.   I've been wondering why 58 was not in HD on DirecTV for years and I finally found this site where you guys are having a good discussion about it.

MY experience is this:  Got my 55" Sony HDTV last year at this time, was amazed by the picture quality of sporting events, especially NFL games, so I invited people over for a Super Bowl party.  Yeah, you guessed it:  I didn't do my homework and didn't realize the SB was on CBS.  Discovered about 4 hours prior to the game that I would NOT be getting the big game in Hi Def.  Mad? :mad:   Oh yeah.

I was so mad I deducted $25 from my next DirecTV bill for not giving me the game in HD, and when they treatened to cancel my account, I said GO AHEAD, and they caved in and gave me $30 off of my bill.   I didnt know who's fault it was at the time, I was mad at both 58 and DTV.   Then my new 55" went out for 1 week of March Madness, so the fact that that was on CBS and not in HD again didn't make me quite as mad.

ANyway, I'm glad I'm still with DTV given all the complaints on this board with TWC.

So it looks like we're stuck with SD for channel 58 on DTV for the forseeable future.  By the sounds of the posts, it could be another year or more.

I did try to connect a small indoor UHF antenna to pick up 58 in HD, but it gave a terrible picture so I took it back.

If anyone can give me the exact make and model of an antenna which they could recommend to pick up 58 in HD, I would really appreciate it.  Based on the knowledge on this board, I'd much rather go with what one of you recommends rather than research this myself and buy (and return) several more antennas.
I live in Menomonee Falls.



Quote from: Tom Snyder;42301Yeah.. the majority of new local HD will be coming from the new bird, but even now it's more than just making room for 58.

And as far as equality on the deals, 4, 6 and 12 don't each own a bunch of other lower power stations that they're trying to get D* to carry as a condition of the package. As I recall, that was one of the sticking points with 58 and TWC.  

I have no "insider" information, but I'd bet that 41,49 and 63 have something to do with it.  Until D* has spot beam capabilities to carry every digital channel in this market, I don't see Jim caving on 58 short term and hoping that they'll carry 41,49 and 63 when they have enough bandwidth. I think he's going all or nothing.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Tom Snyder on Wednesday Nov 28, 2007, 11:03:53 PM
Hey Bill!

Welcome!  My trusty Radio Shack Double Bow tie does the trick for me up in Jackson.. but you'll have a hard time finding those. I picked up a Silver Sensor at the Target in the Falls and it does a decent job as well... you're a good ten miles closer than I am, so it should do just fine.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: jjallou on Thursday Nov 29, 2007, 10:07:24 AM
Quote from: BillC;42733I did try to connect a small indoor UHF antenna to pick up 58 in HD, but it gave a terrible picture so I took it back.

If anyone can give me the exact make and model of an antenna which they could recommend to pick up 58 in HD, I would really appreciate it.  Based on the knowledge on this board, I'd much rather go with what one of you recommends rather than research this myself and buy (and return) several more antennas.
I live in Menomonee Falls.


Welcome to the board!

When you say terrible picture do you mean snowy/ghosty or crystal clear with blocking & breakups? Most sets have an analog & digital tuner in them. Just wondering if you were receiving the right channel 58 (digital channel 46).

I would recommend a Channelmaster 4228 antenna. You can mount this on the roof or in an attic. Marmax (on 60th & Rawson in Franklin) has these as well as Warren Electronics http://www.warrenelectronics.com/
Title: I hate to tell you this....
Post by: Dan the Man on Thursday Nov 29, 2007, 10:49:03 AM
I have a small bow tie antenna I bought at Radio Shack in the falls for $10 and this is connected to my D* HR20 receiver. The antenna has a 3 foot lead and is laying on it's side on the TV stand and guess what??? I get 58-HD pretty good OTA. I get a few break-ups and blocking occasionally but it is really quite remarkable how ell this little thing works. The antenna is only about 12" long.

I will probably buy a better one if this CBS58/D* thing doesn't change in the next few months.

The D* installer actually had put the RF remote antenna (a small stick about 3" long) on the OTA connection and that worked too (that dude was an idiot). I didn't beleive it!!!

I live in Germantown, so I would think any modest indoor antenna would work for you just fine for 58-HD OTA.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: BillC on Sunday Dec 02, 2007, 10:12:39 PM
THanks to all for your advice.
I dont remember the brand of the antenna I bought, but it was from Target.

By 'bad picture' I mean snowy ghosty, wobbly.  YOu think I was picking up the analog broadcast?   How do I pick up the digital broadcast with an over the air antenna?  I have to admit, this is the first time I am trying to pick up HD over the air.

Quote from: jjallou;42739Welcome to the board!

When you say terrible picture do you mean snowy/ghosty or crystal clear with blocking & breakups? Most sets have an analog & digital tuner in them. Just wondering if you were receiving the right channel 58 (digital channel 46).

I would recommend a Channelmaster 4228 antenna. You can mount this on the roof or in an attic. Marmax (on 60th & Rawson in Franklin) has these as well as Warren Electronics http://www.warrenelectronics.com/
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Tom Snyder on Monday Dec 03, 2007, 06:37:10 AM
If it's anything other than crystal clear, it's NOT the HD channel.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Blitzburgh on Monday Dec 03, 2007, 07:41:46 AM
Yup. There are really 3 conditions to HD.

1) Crystal Clear (good signal)

2) No picture (no signal)

3) Pixalation (borderline signal - boucing between good & no signal)
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: jjallou on Monday Dec 03, 2007, 09:32:29 AM
Quote from: BillC;42838THanks to all for your advice.
I dont remember the brand of the antenna I bought, but it was from Target.

By 'bad picture' I mean snowy ghosty, wobbly.  YOu think I was picking up the analog broadcast?   How do I pick up the digital broadcast with an over the air antenna?  I have to admit, this is the first time I am trying to pick up HD over the air.

More than likely you were seeing the analog channel 58.

A few things to consider.

1).  Some sets can scan for analog channels only or digital channels only or both at the same time. Perhaps yours was set to analog only.

2). Digital tuner set for QAM (digital cable) instead of Antenna/OTA.

3). Reception issue causing the set to not pickup channel 46 (58-1) during the channel scan. What brand of antenna did you get from Target? An indoor "should" work where you live but if it doesn't you may need an outdoor antenna with more gain. You could mount it in your attic or on the roof.
Title: Update CBS vs DirectTV
Post by: madsdad on Monday Dec 10, 2007, 09:03:15 PM
Wow nice knowing a newbie can start an interesting thread.  So the man at CBS 58 is Mr. Hall.  My wife nearly killed me when she found out we didn't get yesterdays Packer game in HD.  I rigged a temp antenna up.   I tried changing modes from 4:3 to 16:9 and still never could see the full scoreboard at the top of the screen with DirecTV's standard feed.  It was a shame that I had to watch the Vikings game on Fox after the Packers after moving the antenna cable.  As most people pointed out CBS58 is nothing more then a lower tier station and they will not win people over ever, except for a few specific time slots.  In fact I wonder how many households they are losing from people like me who will refuse to watch their station at all since I can always watch something in HD on a different channel.  How many DirecTV subscribers are we talking about?    Perhaps the Sunday ticket is in my future.  Too bad DirecTV subscribers are a minority otherwise this would make the front page like Big Ten Network and NFL Network for Time Warner subscribers.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Tom Snyder on Tuesday Dec 11, 2007, 06:34:08 AM
Hey Madsdad:

Where do you live that your antenna didn't pick up 58 HD?

I understand your frustration with not being able get their HD feed over D*.  The fact that it's taken so long for us to get HD Locals any other way than over the air is one of the reason why this site has been here...us old-timers have spent several years getting our local HD via our antennas (and helping newer forum members figure out how to do it) because neither TWC nor the satellite services carried them .
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: nwerner on Tuesday Dec 11, 2007, 12:29:40 PM
I have been wondering, is there any benefit for me to pick up HD locals OTA vs. on D*.  I bought an antenna but I really can't tell the difference between OTA & D*.  The only reason I will really use the antenna is for CBS and if the audio dropouts on Ch. 4 are really bad.  

Maybe once the first major storm of the spring hits and I lose the signal, I will be glad that I have the antenna?
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Tom Snyder on Tuesday Dec 11, 2007, 07:17:03 PM
Quoteonce the first major storm of the spring hits and I lose the signal, I will be glad that I have the antenna?
I know *I* am! :)

I got home from work tonight and had a bunch of snow on my dish, and Channel 4 was frozen. I switched to my OTA 4-1, and waited till after dinner to go knock the snow off the dish.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: nwerner on Tuesday Dec 11, 2007, 08:39:48 PM
I got home from work tonight and had a bunch of snow on my dish, and Channel 4 was frozen. I switched to my OTA 4-1, and waited till after dinner to go knock the snow off the dish.

Yup, I had to deal with this tonight as well.  I wasn't enjoying trying to explain to the fiancee why D* is better than TWC because all she could focus on was that we didn't have this issue when we were TWC.  However, a simple run-down of the laundry list or reason seemed to calm her nerves.  Then I knocked the snow off the dish and all is well with the world.  Other than the snow issue, I am still trying to determine if I should be watching locals OTA vs. through D*.  What do you D* users do?
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Tom Snyder on Wednesday Dec 12, 2007, 06:54:26 AM
Because I'm in the woods way out in the boonies, occasionally, multipath gives me some signal burps... so I use the D* version on the ones I can (4,6 and 12), and OTA only for the ones I can't (58 and 36)... the only exception is 4-1, which I'm watching OTA till TMJ gets there voice synchronization issues fixed...

I guess it's nice having a choice... and as far as general picture quality, *I* don't notice any difference.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: psubill78 on Thursday Jan 17, 2008, 06:38:48 PM
I can't believe this non-sense is still going on with channel 58....
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: vegasvic on Thursday Jan 17, 2008, 08:42:03 PM
It's Channel 58.  Nothing they do, or don't do, is surprising.  Minor league operation.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: jeaves79 on Friday Feb 15, 2008, 09:27:58 AM
This is the stupidest thing that I have heard of.  Last week i had an email conversation with Jim Hall.  I was emailing CBS 58 again to see what the status of the HD signal coming on DirecTV.  Told them that I can't get the OTA signal from them, which is true, and that I have had people out to my house trying to get it set up but nothinng works.  Not even my Father In Law who lives 5 miles farther north than me can get it.  I'm in Kenosha BTW.  Here is the jist of his response:

QUOTE: First, let me assure you that we do care about our viewers because without viewers we have no business.  I realize you may feel frustrated with DirecTV not being able to receive our HD signal from CBS.  We would like to be carried by DirecTV, but we have been unable to reach mutually acceptable terms with them.  

 
We do, however, have agreements with DirecTV and Dish for the carriage of our standard analog signal and we have agreements with Time Warner Cable and Charter Communications for our HD signal. This illustrates that we have worked things out with them and other companies in the past. We continue to hope that we can do so in the future.
END QUOTE

To me this reads that CBS58 doesn't care about putting their HD signal on Satellite, they prefer their customers to use TWC and Charter and will continue to endorse them.

They have been denying my waivers ever since i have applied for them.  They have offered to make a hosue call to set up an OTA antenna, but where I live with the trees, I can't get a signal.  Luckily there ar a lack of trees to the south so that signal for DirecTV is fine.  Basically CBS58 is just BSing the customers cause if they truly cared for it's viewers, and wanted CBS to keep it's ratings, waivers would be granted as a temp solution.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: tunce on Friday Feb 15, 2008, 02:51:32 PM
Jim Hall is a complete inept business man.  He has no clue how to operate a TV station.  However this does not surprise me as the parent company has the worst business model I have ever seen.  You are now starting to see this come to light with their new channel and their insistence on "multicasting" withing 1 digital channel.  He will get away with this as long as the market is "in the dark" about HD.  There will be a cry when SD goes black and people start to see his channel compared to the other OTA channels but I am afraid it will be to late.  Then were stuck with a poorly run station that won't listen to the costumers since they own the monopoly here for CBS.  The only government sanctioned monopoly that can do as they please as long as they stick within the very few rules.

Jim might be a great person but he can't run a business.  I am sorry but if I were on the board of directors for your parent company, Weigel Broadcasting, you would have a vote of termanation from me.

For pete-sakes you can't even put up Jeopardy or Wheel of Fortune in HD!
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Nels Harvey on Friday Feb 15, 2008, 03:52:33 PM
Quote from: tunce;44571Jim Hall is a complete inept business man.  He has no clue how to operate a TV station.  
Are you sure that the decision is up to Jim Hall?  The Weigel Broadcasting owner is Howard Shapiro, and having dealt with him, I'm quite sure he is the one controlling the decisions and the purse strings.

Nels....
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: tunce on Friday Feb 15, 2008, 09:14:16 PM
Quote from: Nels Harvey;44573Are you sure that the decision is up to Jim Hall?  The Weigel Broadcasting owner is Howard Shapiro, and having dealt with him, I'm quite sure he is the one controlling the decisions and the purse strings.

Nels....

As I do understand that the board will give a President their vision and then it is up to the President to carry out that vision, BUT he also has the discretion to change or mold that to the best fit for the company.  How he executes it and relays that vision to the customers/clients of their business determines their success.  Which in his case are US!

So I'd say they have failed!
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: gparris on Friday Feb 15, 2008, 09:36:28 PM
Honestly, I wonder what the real thing with CBS58 is that is holding things up?:huh?:

When Dishnetwork finally delivers the HD locals to Milwaukee sometime this year (as it was reported), will CBS58HD again be the missing channel?

As for a DirectvHD changeover in my household (soon dumping TWC if it keeps messing with us), the standard def channel is not all that bad if OTA isn't possible and in some parts of Kenosha, it is almost impossible to get CBS58HD at all.:(

So I do understand the need to get CBS58 "with the programme" - and have Directv offer all 4 HD local channels, like most other areas get when HD locals are added.;)
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Tom Snyder on Friday Feb 15, 2008, 11:30:55 PM
So what happens in Feburary when the analog channel disappears? Will 58 be totally MIA, or will 58 be then forced to make their signal avavilable to D, and if not, will they be willing to be totally MIA on D* while they try to finagle money out them?
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Leinie Lodge on Saturday Feb 16, 2008, 12:45:13 PM
I understand that Indianapolis and Portland OR have experienced similar problems gaining CBS-HD on DirecTV from their local affiliates.

It's surprising that CBS would allow any affiliate in a Top 40 DMA to remain intransigent toward DirecTV, particulary since satellite is a primary migration path for so many former cable viewers.

I hope Mr. Hall becomes more pro-active for HD satellite viewers in our market.  On DirecTV, we've almost completely stopped watching Channel 58 because of their inferior signal quality.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: tunce on Saturday Feb 16, 2008, 07:41:59 PM
Quote from: Tom Snyder;44578So what happens in Feburary when the analog channel disappears? Will 58 be totally MIA, or will 58 be then forced to make their signal avavilable to D, and if not, will they be willing to be totally MIA on D* while they try to finagle money out them?

I had that same thought.  You would think that they will just cave in but who knows.  In all likelihood we will be right back to square one, just like the days when they were the only SD channel not to sign up with Directv.  My word they are such a mess! :mad:
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Leinie Lodge on Sunday Feb 17, 2008, 07:12:27 AM
Tom has mentioned he has the ultimate setup:  DirecTV plus Rooftop OTA for access to all channels.  This is the complete solution, I agree.  However, for recent DirecTV subscribers, issues include:

1.)  The new DirecTV HR21 HD-DVR box does not allow OTA input
2.)  DirecTV plans to roll out PBS-HD later this year per national agreement
3.)  Plunking out $ to install a rooftop antenna and fresh wiring for 1 intransigent channel CBS-HD fails cost/benefit analysis

After 12 years of Time Warner we recently switched to DirecTV.  The change has been a HUGE net win, even minus CBS-HD.   I don't know why it took us so long, but watching TWC's childish spat with Big Ten and NFL made our decision an easy one.  YMMV
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: John L on Sunday Feb 17, 2008, 09:27:59 AM
Oh come, now people.  I just got in trouble for bashing channel 58. So it better STOP right here.  They are doing what they can and they also seem to have a remedy to provide multicasting at the sametime providing CBS network programs in High Definition.

Now as far as WMLW having their own Low Power Digital TV is concern, they may consider putting the multi channels onto WMLW-DT until the outcome of the Presidential Election in November.

If John McCain becomes our president, no doubt he will want to put an end to LPFM and probably low power TV because the NAB doesn't want them, especially Low Power Community FM stations. McCain is a member of the National Association of Broadcasters, or was, 8 years ago anyways.

-John L.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: bradsmainsite on Sunday Feb 17, 2008, 11:53:00 AM
I have to wonder if after the transition the digital channel 58 will come in better.  As I understand it most of the digital transmitting antennas are located on the side of the tower down below the original analog antenna.

May this be skewing the signal towards the kenosha area?  I don't know, but it seems to me that it is not that far of a distance and should be not much of an issue to receive this channel.  I'm curious to know if people are having the same issue with the analog 58 channel, or is it just the digital (46) channel for 58?

Also another fact all members should note is that per the FCC planning factor document 05-199 for our broadcasters the infrastructure is designed around using outdoor antennas placed at 30 feet.  That means if your using any less than this your reception out at the fringe edges, or marginal areas will be sketchy at best.  

There are also specific gains that are figured for the receiving antennas listed in the chart also which states a forward gain of 10db for a UHF antenna.

Now I doubt whether this is the norm anymore, but I did want to raise this point for those who may not have known this, and also why most indoor antennas do not work because the system was never intended for them to be used.

Hope this answers a few questions, and may very well raise others.;)
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Leinie Lodge on Sunday Feb 17, 2008, 12:43:40 PM
It is noteworthy that 4, 6, and 12 all initiated HD on DirecTV quite awhile ago.  The CBS-HD affiliates in Madison and Green Bay (certainly smaller markets than ours) are available on DirecTV as well.
Title: Not Fox
Post by: robster1970 on Sunday Feb 17, 2008, 01:29:54 PM
Green Bay still doesn't have Fox in HD yet. So both markets are missing one of the big ones.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Leinie Lodge on Sunday Feb 17, 2008, 02:28:33 PM
The majority of DirecTV markets offer all 4 major networks in HD, including Madison.
LIN owns WLUK Fox-11, I do wish you more luck than w/Weigel thus far.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Nels Harvey on Sunday Feb 17, 2008, 06:59:48 PM
Quote from: bradsmainsite;44605I have to wonder if after the transition the digital channel 58 will come in better.  As I understand it most of the digital transmitting antennas are located on the side of the tower down below the original analog antenna.

May this be skewing the signal towards the kenosha area?  I don't know, but it seems to me that it is not that far of a distance and should be not much of an issue to receive this channel.  I'm curious to know if people are having the same issue with the analog 58 channel, or is it just the digital (46) channel for 58?

The antenna pattern on file with the FCC for Ch. 46 DTV is sort of rounded heart shape, with maximum gain to the north, south, and west.  This means that their radiation is at their license limit of 1000KW. in those three directions.  The top of the heart shape is to the east, to attenuate the signal over Lake Michigan.  Signals to the southwest, and northwest are about 84 percent of the maximum power.   The station is licensed at 1000KW power ERP at 1174 ft. above average terrain.  Now, if they are really operating according to their license is another question!

Nels....
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Leinie Lodge on Monday Feb 18, 2008, 07:42:22 AM
Do you think this development will resolve the Weigel dilemma ?
http://www.sea-launch.com/current_launch.htm

"DIRECTV 11, combined with the DIRECTV 10 satellite already in orbit, will provide DIRECTV with the capacity for 150 national HD channels and will be capable of supporting spot beams carrying 1,500 local HD channels."
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: jeaves79 on Monday Feb 18, 2008, 10:34:24 AM
it doesn't matter how many satellites DirecTV has up ther eif CBS 58 decided to keep screwing the consumer and not allow it to be broadcast.  I truly belive that he doesn't like DirecTV for some reason and that is why CBS58 is not offered in HD on DirecTV.  he will only put the minimum effort out that he has to to comply with the rules, kinda like my teenage son.


As for the question about weather SD CBS 58 is picked up where I am OTA?  Not very clear where I am at.  That is why this is so upsetting.  I can't get it, and i tell them that I can't get it and I only want a temp channel and they refuse, telling me to go back to TWC or put an OTA up, which i have told them doesn't work for me either.  Adn i am not going back to TWC.  NFLN and Discovery CHANNEL in HD will keep us with DirecTV.
Title: Update CBS58 .vs DirectTV
Post by: madsdad on Friday Feb 22, 2008, 08:41:30 PM
March Madness will start soon.  So called DirectTV back up and ask them to submit a waiver again.  Mr. Hall from CBS 58 how about letting this waiver go through.   I am also wondering about the HD Mega Madness Channels and how that will affect me should I purchase the package.  I will be looking for someone to place an antenna in my attic and run cable to 3 sets.  Ah but that's a different forum.

Mark
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: jeaves79 on Monday Feb 25, 2008, 10:30:08 AM
I jsut received my second waiver denial from DirecTV on saturday.  Definately not happy about it.  Actually my wife was way more angry than I was at the time, she took it and she will start writing her letters now.  


So what is the big deal anyway?  How would it hurt CBS58 to grant the waiver so that viewers who cannot receve the HD signal the ability to receive the new York HD feed?  Is it the local sponsors?  Is New York some sort of utopia that we are not supposed to know about?
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: brewguru on Monday Feb 25, 2008, 11:27:15 AM
Quote from: madsdad;44759March Madness will start soon.  So called DirectTV back up and ask them to submit a waiver again.  Mr. Hall from CBS 58 how about letting this waiver go through.   I am also wondering about the HD Mega Madness Channels and how that will affect me should I purchase the package.  I will be looking for someone to place an antenna in my attic and run cable to 3 sets.  Ah but that's a different forum.

Mark

With the March Madness package, all games will be in HiDef except for the game being broadcast on 58. So, you should get 3 games in HiDef and one not in HiDef on the first Thursday and Friday at all times.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Mags on Monday Feb 25, 2008, 11:31:21 AM
Quote from: brewguru;44801With the March Madness package, all games will be in HiDef except for the game being broadcast on 58. So, you should get 3 games in HiDef and one not in HiDef on the first Thursday and Friday at all times.

That was true in past years (and very frustrating as there was NO way to get the game in HD that our local CBS was broadcasting, since they refused to broadcast their primary game in HD).

But I thought CBS 58 put out a news release this year that said they would do it the correct way this year - and have the primary game always in HD and still have room for the subchannel stuff they like to do???
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: brewguru on Tuesday Feb 26, 2008, 02:56:50 PM
I think you're confusing the Direct TV March Madness package with Channel 58's plans.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Mags on Tuesday Feb 26, 2008, 03:04:51 PM
Quote from: brewguru;44819I think you're confusing the Direct TV March Madness package with Channel 58's plans.


Ah, no I'm not.  See below from Timmy C's article (it was in the CBS vs. D* thread on this board)...

Channel 58 will pre-empt both of its sub-channels during CBS' multicast of NCAA basketball tournament games next month, when it will carry one main game in high-definition and two secondary games in standard definition on the sub-channels.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: brewguru on Wednesday Feb 27, 2008, 09:47:31 AM
Quote from: Mags;44820Ah, no I'm not.  See below from Timmy C's article (it was in the CBS vs. D* thread on this board)...

Channel 58 will pre-empt both of its sub-channels during CBS' multicast of NCAA basketball tournament games next month, when it will carry one main game in high-definition and two secondary games in standard definition on the sub-channels.


Mags: I don't care, nor was I talking about, Channel 58's "sub channels".

I was talking about Direct TV's March Madness package. Channel 58 has one channel on Direct TV (in non-HD). So you will get the games on Channel 58 in non-HiDef. All the other games will be in HiDef through March Madness.

The way you make it sound, is that Channel 58 will grant Direct TV the right to broadcast their signal in HD just for the tournament. Ain't gonna happen.


Timmy C never talks about Direct TV, so I'm not going to look up his article.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Mags on Wednesday Feb 27, 2008, 09:56:21 AM
Quote from: brewguru;44831Mags: I don't care, nor was I talking about, Channel 58's "sub channels".

I was talking about Direct TV's March Madness package. Channel 58 has one channel on Direct TV (in non-HD). So you will get the games on Channel 58 in non-HiDef. All the other games will be in HiDef through March Madness.

The way you make it sound, is that Channel 58 will grant Direct TV the right to broadcast their signal in HD just for the tournament. Ain't gonna happen.


Timmy C never talks about Direct TV, so I'm not going to look up his article.


I see now what you were talking about.  I thought this was a non issue.  I had assumed that most people with D* supplemented their signal with an OTA antenna to be able to get the locals in HD uncompressed (for the most part) - AND to get 58 in HD.

Of course, D* won't get the local 58's HD game.  But since we can get it via OTA anyway, it really doesn't matter.  The bottom line - this is the first year that every person has the ability to get EVERY game in HD.  That is what consumer choice is all about.

If people don't want to buy the D* package and/or install an antenna to get OTA, that is their choice.  But the capability is there for each and every person to get every game in HD this year for the first time.  That has long been my argument - we should all have the ability to do so if we so choose.  CBS 58 has not allowed that in the past due to their refusal to air games in HD and do the multicasting instead.  They finally (it appears) have found a way to do both - which is why I'm excited they are doing so this year!

Hooray CBS-58 for doing the right thing!
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: jeaves79 on Thursday Feb 28, 2008, 01:17:09 PM
CBS 58 HD feed is not coming over my sattelite feed yet, therefore CBS 58 is NOT doing the right thing.  CBS 58 gets no praise until they give consumers full choice of which programming to watch all year long, over every abailable feed, not just for a few basketball games offered in collusion with TWC or OTA.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Mags on Thursday Feb 28, 2008, 01:29:51 PM
I guess I see things a bit differently.  Programming, and programming packages are a product, not unlike anything else a person would purchase.  There is not a rule that every retailer sell the same product.

For example, you can't go to Nissan and demand to buy a Cadillac Escalade.  If that is the product you want, you have to go to the retailer that sells that item - in this case GM/Cadillac.

That is why the whole Big 10 network issue is really a non issue to me.  There is only one "Store" that sells the Big 10 network around here - and that would be Directv.  If you choose not to shop there, and decide to go somewhere else like TWC or OTA, then you can't buy that product.  TWC has decided it doesn't want to sell that product at the price (or tier) that the Big Ten Network requires.  Big deal - go to D* if you want the product.

I guess this same argument applies to CBS 58 HD.  If you want that product, put up an OTA (which is the easiest thing to do, but most people won't) or go to TWC.

Since when is it required for every retailer to offer every product out there?  It's a free market - buy what you want.  The key point here is that all the above (and the NFL network too) are available - but only certain stores sell it, so you have to go to those stores.

Again, a lot of hubub about nothing in my opinion.  It appears to me that if you "want it all", the ONLY solution is D* with an OTA antenna.  You get all the programming, the best picture, arguably the best price.

For people that are serious about their HD TV (which most everyone here is), it confuses me why not everybody has that type of setup.  While I'm sure there are folks that can't install a dish, for the vast majority of us, it is an option that some people just choose not to do.

Stop complaining folks - if you don't like the product or provider you have now and what they offer, then move to one that has the service you desire.  Complaining about CBS58 or TWC won't help - although admittedly it may help you feel better (temporarily) by complaining.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: tunce on Thursday Feb 28, 2008, 01:57:17 PM
For crying out load Mags are you on Jimmy's pay roll or what.  This thread is discussing the lack of HD-58 on Directv.  It has nothing to do with - go out and by TWC if your not happy garbage that you are vomiting out at us.  :mad:
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Mags on Thursday Feb 28, 2008, 02:08:50 PM
Quote from: tunce;44846For crying out load Mags are you on Jimmy's pay roll or what.  This thread is discussing the lack of HD-58 on Directv.  It has nothing to do with - go out and by TWC if your not happy garbage that you are vomiting out at us.  :mad:

Tunce:

That is EXACTLY my point.  Not every provider has the same programming.  Not every provider is perfect either.  If you want CBS-58 HD, then there are ways to get it.  D* isn't one of them.  If you want Big 10 and NFL network, then get D*.

It's a wonderful world of consumer choice.  You can buy what you want.  Why not emphasize the positive side of things - D* HAS Big 10 and NFL!  Ok, it doesn't have CBS-58 - so what?  It has so many other great things.  AND, you can get CBS-58 by putting up an antenna.

You'll live a much happier life looking at the positive spin, rather than complaining that a specific retailer doesn't carry the product you want.

As we've seen on this board over the years, complaining about it doesn't help.  To quote Brian McNamee "It is what it is".  

BE HAPPY!
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: jeaves79 on Friday Feb 29, 2008, 10:13:14 AM
QuoteI guess this same argument applies to CBS 58 HD. If you want that product, put up an OTA (which is the easiest thing to do, but most people won't) or go to TWC.

Sure it's easy, if you have the time and Money, and after that time and Money you put up the antenna, turn on your TV and there is no picture because you can't receive an OTA for CBS 58 then what?  Am I not allowed to complain anymore?  

Last time I checked, I lived in America, and I also was in a thread that was full of people complaining about the LACK of CBS 58 in HD on DirecTV.  If you don't like the topic, don't come in here telling us all to shut up, simply ignore the topic.  You have the whole rest of the forum to run around in, go find another topic, or better yet go start a thread complaining about complainers, and feel free to tell people to shut up in that thread all yo uwant.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Mags on Friday Feb 29, 2008, 10:33:48 AM
Quote from: jeaves79;44860Sure it's easy, if you have the time and Money, and after that time and Money you put up the antenna, turn on your TV and there is no picture because you can't receive an OTA for CBS 58 then what?  Am I not allowed to complain anymore?  

Last time I checked, I lived in America, and I also was in a thread that was full of people complaining about the LACK of CBS 58 in HD on DirecTV.  If you don't like the topic, don't come in here telling us all to shut up, simply ignore the topic.  You have the whole rest of the forum to run around in, go find another topic, or better yet go start a thread complaining about complainers, and feel free to tell people to shut up in that thread all yo uwant.


Wow... you gotta love new members, with a whole 7 posts, that feel like they run the place already.  I'll bet all 7 posts have been complaining about something, without adding anything positive toward the forum at this point.  :OnAir:

Guess what?  A good antenna will cost you $100.  Mast will be less than $20.  Coax is cheap.  Go up into your attic and install an antenna.  Unless you are more than say 40 miles from Milwaukee, this will work fine.  

If you are more than 40 miles and want CBS HD - then move closer to Milwaukee!  :D
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Talos4 on Friday Feb 29, 2008, 11:05:10 AM
Wow!

hideing_behind_compu
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: klwillis45 on Friday Feb 29, 2008, 11:21:17 AM
Wow Mags, you should really quit now. You complain about people complaining, throw out a bad analogy (car dealers), and now play the "post count" card.
Yeesh.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: REVM1M on Friday Feb 29, 2008, 11:27:50 AM
Quote from: Mags;44861Wow... you gotta love new members, with a whole 7 posts, that feel like they run the place already.  I'll bet all 7 posts have been complaining about something, without adding anything positive toward the forum at this point.  :OnAir:

Guess what?  A good antenna will cost you $100.  Mast will be less than $20.  Coax is cheap.  Go up into your attic and install an antenna.  Unless you are more than say 40 miles from Milwaukee, this will work fine.  

If you are more than 40 miles and want CBS HD - then move closer to Milwaukee!  :D

because you have 184 posts, doesn't make you senior member or anything! We welcome all the new members.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Mags on Friday Feb 29, 2008, 11:37:18 AM
Quote from: klwillis45;44863Wow Mags, you should really quit now. You complain about people complaining, throw out a bad analogy (car dealers), and now play the "post count" card.
Yeesh.

I'll agree to disagree on this one.  The car dealer was a great analogy in my opinion.

But listen to people whine about something they have total control to change?  How stupid is that?  And to support someone whining about it?  Doesn't make sense.  

All I'm saying is that there are ways to get CBS HD.  Every program provider doesn't offer it.  BIG DEAL.  It is a free market.  Choose the provider that gives you the best overall product.

It is NOT a legal requirement that every provider offer exactly the same programming.

That's all I'm saying.  It is frustrating listening to people complain about something that is totally in their control.

While you are right on the post count issue, if a member joins recently just to put out complaint threads - well, I thought this site was to share information and ideas.

Just tryin' to help people stay postive and take the high road.  I'm sure some people won't be able to do so, as it is so the American way to complain about things that are in your control and blame someone else for your trouble.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: jeaves79 on Friday Feb 29, 2008, 11:39:59 AM
Quote from: Mags;44861Wow... you gotta love new members, with a whole 7 posts, that feel like they run the place already.  I'll bet all 7 posts have been complaining about something, without adding anything positive toward the forum at this point.  :OnAir:

Guess what?  A good antenna will cost you $100.  Mast will be less than $20.  Coax is cheap.  Go up into your attic and install an antenna.  Unless you are more than say 40 miles from Milwaukee, this will work fine.  

If you are more than 40 miles and want CBS HD - then move closer to Milwaukee!  :D

After 184 posts you still can't read?  Did you not see where I posted that I already put up an antenna and couldn't get the signal?

So where is it in the forum rules that new members need to add value?  What have you added other than, "Get your service from TWC, thay are the best!"
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Mags on Friday Feb 29, 2008, 11:48:15 AM
Quote from: jeaves79;44866What have you added other than, "Get your service from TWC, thay are the best!"

Well, I certainly didn't say TWC was the best.  Actually my signature is pretty clear that I have D* with an antenna.  I'm about 30 miles from the antenna farm, with an antenna in the attic, and have never had a problem.

Had D* since '94 - and would never go back to cable.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: jeaves79 on Friday Feb 29, 2008, 11:57:43 AM
Quote from: Mags;44867Well, I certainly didn't say TWC was the best.  Actually my signature is pretty clear that I have D* with an antenna.  I'm about 30 miles from the antenna farm, with an antenna in the attic, and have never had a problem.

Had D* since '94 - and would never go back to cable.

Well FANTASTIC for you!

So if someone were to look at all of your 180+ numerous, helpfull, witty and value adding posts, they would never find a complaint about any service of anykind?
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: klwillis45 on Friday Feb 29, 2008, 12:13:35 PM
Mags, I probably owe you an explanion of why I think that analogy is bad so here's a couple points:

1) It's not a proprietary issue. No one is complaining that D* doesn't offer Time Warner Sports, MOJO, or the Voom channels. I expect to hear more kicking and screaming if E* launches with 58 HD.

2) You can buy caddy from a nissan dealer, it just won't be new. ;)


D* may be the absolute perfect option for some people save this one issue and they have every right to complain.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Talos4 on Friday Feb 29, 2008, 12:32:34 PM
QuoteGuess what? A good antenna will cost you $100. Mast will be less than $20. Coax is cheap. Go up into your attic and install an antenna. Unless you are more than say 40 miles from Milwaukee, this will work fine.

If you are more than 40 miles and want CBS HD - then move closer to Milwaukee!

That type pf comment is not necessary,

There are many folks who either, live further from the city, live in rented apartments, Condo's, with common roofs, do not want an "ugly" antenna on the roof (although mine is beautiful :) ) etc.

The complaint about 58 is legitimate, that's what this thread is all about.

To come in throw insults around demean those who cannot get the OTA is just plain bad taste.

And the post count thing?  This isn't AVS. Let's keep it that way.

Forum decorum, it is alive and well, but the leash is only so long.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Cheesehead Dave on Friday Feb 29, 2008, 02:24:33 PM
With my HR21 box, OTA really isn't an option for me until the AM21 is released.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: vegasvic on Friday Feb 29, 2008, 04:38:07 PM
It's about time this forum gets hoppin  :cool:

Although the "I have more posts than you so I'm right and you're wrong" argument is about as lame as you can get.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: gparris on Saturday Mar 01, 2008, 08:06:28 AM
The only thing I can relate to this thread after a time is why CBS58 does not work with Directv as it does with TWC and U-Verse to get the HD signal to those subscribers. I can only wonder what is going on why Directv is being singled out.
Once Dishnetwork has the capability to add the local Milwaukee HD channels, as it is now planned to do, will CBS58 once again play this game it has with Directv for so long?
Is CBS58 biased toward satellite companies vs. landline-based delivery systems and it has nothing to do with cost? :confused:
Honestly, I see no reason why CBS58 would not want to make a offer to Directv for its HD signal by now, but it will not deter me from getting Directv in the future as the CBS58 SD signal is passable for now with so many other HD channels in the mix from this provider.
Maybe I will just make a new habit of watching/recording CBS58 a lot less in the future-maybe that is what CBS58 is hoping new DirectvHD subscribers will do...seems like an odd "business model" for growth.:huh?:
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Tom Snyder on Saturday Mar 01, 2008, 12:23:45 PM
The post count is only relevant if a person hasn't been around long enough to know what is inappropriate to post.  I've edited some inappropriate language in that post, and will let this thread continue... but I'll be watching carefully. :OnAir:

As far as the CBS58 / DirecTV issue... I appreciate your frustration.. I wish I didn't have to have an antenna to pick up 58-1... but I'm 20 miles out, and I have a little old Radio Shack indoor antenna hidden out of view that picks it up just fine. I would be more angry if I live far away enough that I couldn't get it at all.

That said, you guys have no clue as to the negotiation sticking points and technical considerations that are involved between 58 and D*, and I'd be very careful about making assumptions that the issue here is as simple as Weigel being cheap, or disrespecting their viewers, or any one of the other theories that are being lobbed here.

It's a free market... and it's BIG. Market forces will speak louder than words in a little internet TV forum. If you don't like a product or service, don't use it. If enough people stop using/buying (and in a market this size, that will take A LOT more people than have ever posted in this site since we started), then change will happen.

In the meantime, let's keep the conversation civil, and until the CBS outlet in Milwaukee provides you with a product that's satisfactory, let's use our resources to help make the best of the situation.  

I know we want everything... so do crying three year olds in the grocery store.  But let's be adults, shall we?
Title: Ooh the confusion!
Post by: PixelPete on Wednesday Mar 19, 2008, 01:21:07 PM
Wouldn't the car analogy be more like: All of the Nissan dealers sell the fancy new Altima with turbo, except in Milwaukee; they only carry the regular engine but still sell it at the same price. If you want the turbo you have to have a third party install it (and pay extra for it).

Call it complaining or not, but it's pretty pathetic that if I want to watch "local HD" that I would have to pay extra for it. Not only do I have to buy an antenna and run another ugly cable in my living room, but I also have to get a digi tuner because my older HDtv did not come with one. So free TV is not so free.

I also am disappointed in D*, in that they advertise Get Your Local Channels! like its a droppable feature. If that were the case, I should be able to call them and be able to elect to not take that "feature" and stick with the East or West or ALL of the feeds. I'm just sayin'!
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: jjallou on Wednesday Mar 19, 2008, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: PixelPete;45183Call it complaining or not, but it's pretty pathetic that if I want to watch "local HD" that I would have to pay extra for it. Not only do I have to buy an antenna and run another ugly cable in my living room, but I also have to get a digi tuner because my older HDtv did not come with one. So free TV is not so free.

But it's a one time charge. Once it's installed you don't shell out month to month just to see local tv.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: bubbaridesfast on Wednesday Mar 19, 2008, 01:43:52 PM
Quote from: PixelPete;45183Wouldn't the car analogy be more like: All of the Nissan dealers sell the fancy new Altima with turbo, except in Milwaukee; they only carry the regular engine but still sell it at the same price. If you want the turbo you have to have a third party install it (and pay extra for it).

Call it complaining or not, but it's pretty pathetic that if I want to watch "local HD" that I would have to pay extra for it. Not only do I have to buy an antenna and run another ugly cable in my living room, but I also have to get a digi tuner because my older HDtv did not come with one. So free TV is not so free.

I also am disappointed in D*, in that they advertise Get Your Local Channels! like its a droppable feature. If that were the case, I should be able to call them and be able to elect to not take that "feature" and stick with the East or West or ALL of the feeds. I'm just sayin'!

Since when is everything in life free? You didn't buy an HDTV - you bought a monitor. People had to be careful in the early HD days because TV's with tuners were always much more expensive.

No offense meant but think about this, since you will not use an antennea, you already were resigned to paying for all of your locals anyway, whether in HD or SD. You are either paying for cable or paying for SAT to get your locals. The cheapest way has always been an antennea. The price of that OVER TIME is considerably less unless you try to reason that you want to pay TWC or SAT co's the extra for the other HD channels anyway.

Signed,
an early HD adopter who paid $50 for an antennea because once  upon a time there was no other HD available - $ well spent.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: PixelPete on Wednesday Mar 19, 2008, 04:26:15 PM
I see your guys' points but it's more than just money; heck I paid for all the components to get this far. It's also the non-user friendly nature of it all. And quite frankly I feel a little stupid for taking for granted that being with TWC all of these years it didn't even occur to me that one of the major network channels wouldn't be in HD on D*. It seems inconceivable to me.  
BTW, I got the antenna last night and the receiver today; I'm good to go.
It's not the money, it's the absurdity (and visual ugliness) of it all.

And yet some how I'm still having fun.

:Badger

{glug}
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Tom Snyder on Wednesday Mar 19, 2008, 06:56:31 PM
A little Math exercise.. DirecTV planned for 4 channels in each local market for starts (ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox). Here in Milwaukee 6 got one channel, 12 got one, and Channel 4 got two.  

How many signals does/will Wiegel have in Milwaukee that they would like on Satellite?  Is it to far a stretch that they might want all theirs available, and D* just doesn't have the bandwidth? So it's all or nothing?
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Bluto on Thursday Mar 20, 2008, 07:21:16 AM
Quote from: Tom Snyder;45191A little Math exercise.. DirecTV planned for 4 channels in each local market for starts (ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox). Here in Milwaukee 6 got one channel, 12 got one, and Channel 4 got two.  

How many signals does/will Wiegel have in Milwaukee that they would like on Satellite?  Is it to far a stretch that they might want all theirs available, and D* just doesn't have the bandwidth? So it's all or nothing?


Channel 4 only got 4-1, right?  4-2 isn't delivered by D*.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Talos4 on Thursday Mar 20, 2008, 08:33:55 AM
Quote from: Bluto;45198Channel 4 only got 4-1, right?  4-2 isn't delivered by D*.

As far as I know that's correct. 4-2 does not show up on my Channels I get list.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: vegasvic on Thursday Mar 20, 2008, 12:06:57 PM
That's correct.  Only one channel 4 on D*
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: brewguru on Thursday Mar 20, 2008, 03:19:53 PM
Quote from: Tom Snyder;45191A little Math exercise.. DirecTV planned for 4 channels in each local market for starts (ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox). Here in Milwaukee 6 got one channel, 12 got one, and Channel 4 got two.  

How many signals does/will Wiegel have in Milwaukee that they would like on Satellite?  Is it to far a stretch that they might want all theirs available, and D* just doesn't have the bandwidth? So it's all or nothing?

Tom, I may be off-base here, but it seems you are always making excuses for Channel 58? Why is that?

Also, why would D* give WTMJ 2 channels (which is untrue) and neglect CBS? And when D* offered locals, Channel 41 or whatever else Channel 58 was doing wasn't even a factor.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: vegasvic on Thursday Mar 20, 2008, 04:09:51 PM
I don't want to speak for Tom but I think he's just trying to give the other side of the issue.  

Personally I don't know who to believe but it does seem odd that the other stations have had no problem coming to an agreement with D*.  And we went through this before with the SD channels.

It would be a nice gesture for 58 to grant waivers to those that request them.  There can't be that many people requesting them and it would show some good will to their viewers.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Tom Snyder on Thursday Mar 20, 2008, 10:02:44 PM
I'm not making excuses for 58...

I'm like a lot of you guys... on those occasions where I've DVR'ed something from CBS58-1 OTA and start watching it, only to discover that wind in the trees, or some other atmospheric problem has caused my recording to become corrupted and unwatchable.. .and it's too late to switch to the SD version...

and I curse Jim Hall and D*.

I have asked Jim several times what the hold up was on 58 and D,* even with promises that it would not be published here...and he simply will not answer. I have requested a waiver, and personally requested attention to that waiver from Jim... and got rejected. I am by no means a member of the Jim Hall fan club.

Things get pretty ugly here sometimes. And I could come here and just fuel the fire. Or conversely, I could nuke posts and ban members...

But I'm choosing to raise the level of discourse, encourage intelligent dialogue by injecting some perspective and suggesting some possibilities that people just may not have thought about.

Yup... I stand corrected on 4-2. I just get it on my channel list and never pay attention to whether it is coming from my dish or my Radio Shack double bowtie. SO it would appear that D* has allocated just 4 channels for each market. No exception for WTMJ, but they were pragmatic and gave up on 4-2 and just settled for 4-1.  

What is D* offering to 58, and what are 58's demands?  I have no clue, and I can only guess... but it's unfair (and probably a bit foolish) for me to think I know enough to make accusations and call people names based on that guess.

Oh.. as long as we keep complaining, it maintains the pressure for both sides to get a deal done (not sure which side actually benefits).. and waivers just would lesson that pressure.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: vegasvic on Friday Mar 21, 2008, 08:40:14 AM
You're right, none of us know what DirecTV is offering 58 and what 58 is asking for.  

It does seem odd that 4, 6 and 12 can come to an agreement and 58 can't.  And the EXACT same thing happened with SD.

It could be that 4,6 and 12 are much more successful stations and don't need to try to squeeze out every last nickel they can and they actually think about their viewers needs.  But that's just a guess.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: brewguru on Monday Mar 24, 2008, 04:05:56 PM
Quote from: Tom Snyder;45241I'm not making excuses for 58...

I'm like a lot of you guys... on those occasions where I've DVR'ed something from CBS58-1 OTA and start watching it, only to discover that wind in the trees, or some other atmospheric problem has caused my recording to become corrupted and unwatchable.. .and it's too late to switch to the SD version...

and I curse Jim Hall and D*.

I have asked Jim several times what the hold up was on 58 and D,* even with promises that it would not be published here...and he simply will not answer. I have requested a waiver, and personally requested attention to that waiver from Jim... and got rejected. I am by no means a member of the Jim Hall fan club.

Things get pretty ugly here sometimes. And I could come here and just fuel the fire. Or conversely, I could nuke posts and ban members...

But I'm choosing to raise the level of discourse, encourage intelligent dialogue by injecting some perspective and suggesting some possibilities that people just may not have thought about.

Yup... I stand corrected on 4-2. I just get it on my channel list and never pay attention to whether it is coming from my dish or my Radio Shack double bowtie. SO it would appear that D* has allocated just 4 channels for each market. No exception for WTMJ, but they were pragmatic and gave up on 4-2 and just settled for 4-1.  

What is D* offering to 58, and what are 58's demands?  I have no clue, and I can only guess... but it's unfair (and probably a bit foolish) for me to think I know enough to make accusations and call people names based on that guess.

Oh.. as long as we keep complaining, it maintains the pressure for both sides to get a deal done (not sure which side actually benefits).. and waivers just would lesson that pressure.

Fair enough, Tom.

But I think from Jim Hall's refusal to answer qustions from you, from me, from anyone, that Channel 58 is asking for the moon and he knows it.

They are being unfair to the consumer and he knows it.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: jeaves79 on Tuesday Mar 25, 2008, 01:26:45 PM
QuoteFair enough, Tom.

But I think from Jim Hall's refusal to answer qustions from you, from me, from anyone, that Channel 58 is asking for the moon and he knows it.

They are being unfair to the consumer and he knows it.

It's because Jim Hall doesn't care one bit what the consumer thinks.  

I believe that he's got a deal with TWC.  He pushes TWC and OTA on everyone who complains because he doesn't want to deal with DirecTV anymore than he has to.  Nothing else explains why NBC, FOX and ABC cut deals with DirecTV, and CBS58 won't.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: brewguru on Wednesday Mar 26, 2008, 10:45:48 AM
I also find it interesting that Jim Hall posts here, but will not respond in this topic.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Bebop on Wednesday Mar 26, 2008, 12:28:41 PM
What's the point for them to post the same answer if 58's stance has not changed?
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: brewguru on Thursday Mar 27, 2008, 11:58:06 AM
Quote from: Bebop;45332What's the point for them to post the same answer if 58's stance has not changed?


The thing is that NO ONE knows 58's stance since they won't comment.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Bebop on Thursday Mar 27, 2008, 12:54:54 PM
Quote from: brewguru;45347The thing is that NO ONE knows 58's stance since they won't comment.

58 give an answer a long time ago.  I see that you joined in late 07, maybe that's why. :) Someone with memory better than me can probably recalled the detail. Otherwise, do a search you'll probably find it.

Basically 58 wanted money and DirecTV will not pay.
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: Cheesehead Dave on Friday Mar 28, 2008, 11:30:49 AM
Here's the response I got:

QuoteDirecTV does not have an agreement in place with us that would allow them to carry our HD signal. Negotiations with them have been ongoing, and we hope for a resolution in the coming year.
Anyone living within our Grades A or B coverage areas (Southeastern Wisconsin) should be able to receive our over-the-air High Def signal, and are therefore not eligible for a waiver.
Please let us know if you require any technical assistance with achieving a quality over-the-air picture.
Thank you for your correspondence.

Christine Grotelueschen
Office Manager
WDJT / WMLW / WYTU
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: brewguru on Friday Mar 28, 2008, 11:54:03 AM
So a secretary at Channel 58 responded to you.

That's my point. Why can't Jim Hall respond to anyone? Also, this was well over a year ago, what's the update? Why does Channel 58 want more money than the other local channels received?
Title: CBS58 vs. DirectTV
Post by: vegasvic on Friday Mar 28, 2008, 05:30:37 PM
Maybe they are demanding that DTV includes the new "ME-TV".  I mean who doesn't want more Petticoat Junction, Mork & Mindy and Bewitched? :rolleyes: