chamb Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 http://www.slashgear.com/two-tv-stations-will-try-sharing-one-channel-so-your-lte-can-get-faster-28314825/? Two LA TV stations will simultaneously share a single channel for broadcasts, as a pilot program to demonstrate not only that the technology works with no downside for viewers, but that it can be a valuable source of cash too. The scheme will see KLCS "hosting" KJLA's---- This has been something I have thought of for some time. I sometimes see a station have one HD broadcast with 3 low quality worthless secondary channels. Why not have only TWO feeds(even competitors) both with decent quality. There is no reason why two competitors can not share the transmitter equipment and the cost. Then a channel becomes free to sell for cash. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dnwk Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 http://www.slashgear.com/two-tv-stations-will-try-sharing-one-channel-so-your-lte-can-get-faster-28314825/? Two LA TV stations will simultaneously share a single channel for broadcasts, as a pilot program to demonstrate not only that the technology works with no downside for viewers, but that it can be a valuable source of cash too. The scheme will see KLCS "hosting" KJLA's---- This has been something I have thought of for some time. I sometimes see a station have one HD broadcast with 3 low quality worthless secondary channels. Why not have only TWO feeds(even competitors) both with decent quality. There is no reason why two competitors can not share the transmitter equipment and the cost. Then a channel becomes free to sell for cash. Those secondary channel is not worthless. They still get paid by cables as re-transmission fee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chamb Posted January 29, 2014 Author Share Posted January 29, 2014 Those secondary channel is not worthless. They still get paid by cables as re-transmission fee In most areas, some of the major stations do have a good secondary channel or two. But I also see some channels that are occupied with worthless crap on the primary HD channel and more worthless crap on the secondary channels. It is way past time for some consolidation and put the bandwidth into use for something worthwhile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCM Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 There was/is a blog post on rabbitears.info conceptualizing ATSC 2.0 and how the standard would have two stations shareone channel. I can't find it at the moment though. It is way past time for some consolidation and put the bandwidth into use for something worthwhile. "Worthwhile" is very subjective. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericdabbs Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 I am curious to see the results of this testing. Hopefully it means that coexistence can occur and that the 600 MHz auction can be a success. I know Sprint and Tmobile really are depending on the availability of this spectrum. But after the 600 MHz auction, the FCC should stop and leave the remaining low band spectrum to the TV broadcasters. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.