Milwaukee HDTV User Group

Quote from: Bebop;59653Free antenna for TW customer. It's probably cheaper for them to install antenna than to deal with local stations every few years.

It used to be that Dish or DirecTV, maybe both, had an input on their STBs for a local antenna so they could switch seamlessly between satellite and terrestrial.  No idea whether they still do.

Does TW offer any boxes with this provision?  If they did, for many subscribers, it would be effortless to use the local antenna input.  Of course then TW would be faced with customers wanting local channels unbundled.  But, if they wanted to stick it to JBG and the rest, it might be worth it.

Quote from: gparris;59629This means, if each analogue channel holds the space of at least 2 HD channels, these going digital-only, the prospect of maybe 20 more HD channels that can be added and with those FOX channels being added (other thread), a workable thing from that perspective.

To what extent does TW reduce data (internet) congestion by segmenting the network vs. allocating additional spectrum to data?  

I am wondering if some of the free space will be used for internet market-wide, both to increase capacity and provide higher tiers of service, or if they tend to build out fiber closer and closer to customers for the same effect.

Quote from: beerbrat;59612I see most everyone here bought the 6141...I decided to try the 5341J.  No issues so far.

Did you note what factory firmware the 5341J came with, and whether that changed after you plugged in to Time Warner?  When you get a chance can you please post the current firmware version?

Quote from: mrschimpf;59602According to the Racine Journal Times, blame TMJ on this one; they're "exercising its rights" to NBC programming in the area, so WMAQ gets blacked out in Racine and Kenosha.

Sorry, thanks, I was erroneously thinking he was referring to WMAQ's internet feed, not the OTA feed picked up for the Racine/Kenosha area.

Quote from: gparris;59596last night when I tried watching The Tonight Show ... channel 5 from Chicago's programming feed from NBC on TWC is now banned, too.

Are you saying that WMAQ "blocks" their feed to Milwaukee-area IPs, or that TWC is blocking the WMAQ feed?  What indication did you get of either action, or the responsible party?

Quote from: jfelbab;59598The pair of DTA's I ordered arrived today and neither goes past searching for channels.  I called TW and they are rolling a tech to see what is happening. They do seem to respond quickly to Signature service customer issues. Seems like this should just work out of the box but no dice for me.

I thought the usual MO for these was that you had to hook it up, turn it on, and then call them with the MAC address to get it authorized.   (Presumably this removes the incentive for theft in transit.)

Quote from: LoadStar;59571because this box is compatible with PowerKEY, it gives you access to all the non-SDV digital channels in the standard TV package, most of which aren't transmitted in clear QAM. (Far as I know, the only channels Time Warner transmits in clear QAM are the broadcast stations.)

Thanks.  For some reason I had thought you were saying this box only tuned broadcast (OTA) stations in QAM.  Reading back, I am not sure where I got that idea.  So you're saying it gets you standard and basic in QAM, encrypted and non-encrypted, as long as the channels aren't switched digital, right?  

Any idea whether they are providing these for what I think they call BASIC customers as well?  That's the program that includes OTA NTSC, basic NTSC, and OTA Clear QAM.  It cost about $20 a few years ago.

If I'm reading your info correctly, the rack rates are then $35 to $105 per month.  

Think how much better off TW shareholders would be if every customer paid $105 a month rather than $35 or any amount less than $105.  Once they cover their fixed costs, the rest is gravy, and they get a lot more gravy from the $105 customers than the $35 customers.  Sure, there are some infrastructure upgrades needed to support higher tiers but with contracted subscribers it's hard to see how they wouldn't be able to cover those.  

In their perfect world, everyone is at $105.  For a few years, they would make money hand over fist until the pay TV subscriber base dies off or no longer finds enough value to subscribe.  In other words, they don't care what service (TV, music, internet, phone) the money comes from, but when they're bringing in less money, they lose their jobs.  

People who are now paying $105 are low-hanging fruit.  Most of them probably want the fastest available service, regardless of the cost.  The trick is to "add" enough perception of value that the $35 people and the middle tiers won't feel they are getting ripped off.  Doesn't sound like you're on board yet.   Advice:  Become a shareholder.

Am I missing something?  Sounds like it's just an external clear QAM tuner.  

The cut sheet says it can tune encryption using DNCS and uDTA but I have no idea if Time Warner is using anything compatible.  

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/video/ps8611/ps8612/ps10771/7023333_a.pdf

Quote from: ddeerrff;59523Need to go back to basic "Must Carry" with no fees.  Advertising is supposed to pay for content.  If the viewer needs to pay for content, then dump the commercials.

No cable customer or cable company is going to disagree with that.  But no OTA station owner would agree.

A better argument would be one that no rational person could disagree with.  I haven't heard that one yet.

Quote from: Bebop;59524... just noticed mine SB6141 has been updated to: SB_KOMODO-1.0.6.12-SCM00-NOSH on July 30th.


Looked like TW will up their modem rental fee to $6 ...

Thanks for the update on firmware issues.  That makes sense as they did the same with my CPE DPC2100 as soon as I connected it.  I read about the increase on DSLR yesterday too.  

Any "newer" rumors on how long until they eliminate DOCSIS 2 in this market?  

I just bought another DPC2100 as a backup, for $15.  But I do wonder if I call them, if they will authorize it.  At least it was a small amount of money to throw out the window.  After watching the 5341J on Amazon for a few months, it seems to fluctuate between about $75-100, in one $25 increment.   (I also wonder what is the variable that makes the price change like that overnight.)

Some other imperfect "solution" would have been implemented.  I remember the uproar at the time.  My employer was paying about $3.50 per pop for well over 1000 units and the cable company wanted to raise it to $10 or so.  Part of their justification was this act, although other programming costs were going up fast as well.

Eventually the market will resolve this problem.  As I've said many times before, local TV is headed down the tubes.  It no longer serves the public interest, since their coverage of daily local affairs concentrates on personality problems in leadership rather than actual issues such as tax policy, local control and civic matters.  If it weren't for the weather and the Packers, they would already be out of business.

Quote from: murdoc;59481No loss here.  Go outside and enjoy the short summer.

Amen.  Who at JBG negotiated a July contract expiration?  They need to bargain for n years plus three or six months to get some leverage.  

With digital boxes, TW can probably get a pretty good idea how many of their customers are not watching 4.1, let alone 4.2 and 4.3.

Congratulations on your frugality and your ability to delay gratification.  Now then ... You have been assimilated.  Before you undergo the hypnosis of the big screen, set a calendar reminder for Christmas or so to check back in with a review.

From the JBG FAQ.  I put the FAQ quotations in italics.  My comments are not in italics.  

13. How much of my Time Warner Cable bill is actually paid to broadcasters in the local market?

Time Warner does not disclose how much it pays each broadcaster and we cannot provide specific details of our agreement with Time Warner because of contractual restrictions.

Put simply and clearly, neither Time Warner nor Journal Broadcast Group benefits by publicizing the facts of the case.  It's more productive for them to use certain language to exploit their customers' (TW) and viewers' (JBG) pre-existing biases as a means to serve their respective ends.  

Let's put it simply and clearly.  

Oh, so you're going to put it simply and clearly without giving specifics.  Nice try.  There is nothing clear or simple about what you say below:

Less than one (1) penny per day of your current bill to Time Warner goes to pay for each Journal station's license fee.

OK, so first, what is the "average" customer's  bill?  Second, does that mean one penny per station per day, i.e. if I get three channels (4-1, 4-2, 4-3), TW pays JBG $0.03 per day?  Or $0.01 per day for all three?  

If Time Warner accepts our current proposal, that rate would be less than four (4) pennies per day at the end of our proposed agreement.  

Using my previous example, does that mean $0.04 per day or or $0.12 per day?  

Quoting daily fees and using words like "less than" and "pennies" are meant to make the amounts sound small.  But the existing amount could be $3.65 per year or $10.95 per year now, and the future amounts could be $14.60 per year or $43.80 per year.

$3.65 per year for, let's say, a million customers is $3,650,000.  Divide that by 365 days and we see it's $10,000 per day.  Now we're talking about real money, aren't we?