Now, I don't work for a broadcast television station, nor have I ever. However, I am skeptical of the above paragraph. You are correct that it costs money to continue to operate the analog broadcasts, but I'd be surprised if it's really that much. Don't most stations already have engineers to keep things working? That would imply that the maintenance costs are fairly level between operating two signals and only one. Also, the power bill for transmitting a full-power 100kW television station would only run under $8500 per month on a national average.Scooter wrote: They lose money by continuing to operate an outdated, worn out analog broadcast equipment which take more power to operate and which needs constant repair and maintenence to keep running. If they have to continue using this equipment, they have to spend money to keep it running which they wouldn't have to have spent had they cut over to the new equipment which they have already spent a lot of money on but which isn't being used. Some stations have been broadcasting two signals, one analog and one digital and the cost to maintain two signals for a longer period is, well, more expensive.
Besides, I do not believe most stations will be cutting their broadcast power. The new rules do require the VHF-band stations (currently 1-13) to cut their power, which will lower their effective range. However, UHF stations can continue to operate at full power (which uses even more power than full-power VHF). So, any VHF stations are actually moving to UHF frequencies so that they can maintain their broadcast range.
Also, you even mentioned that many (most, in my experience) stations are broadcasting both digital and analog at this point. That means that they aren't just letting their shiny new digital equipment sit around. I just checked and according to the FCC, most television stations CAN transition early, many just by turning off their analog broadcasts. They simply have chosen not to do so. The only ones who HAVE to wait are the ones whose new band is some other station's old band.
The people really getting screwed are the ones who already leased the bandwidth to be freed by the transition.
Public broadcasting is a very different beast than commercial broadcasting. They aren't nearly as dependent on attracting viewers, and they only kinda-sorta make money from advertising revenue. If you're in that position, sure it makes sense to transition early.Seriously, one of the motivations why Nebraska Public TV made the move was so they could scrap their outdated, overly costly to maintain analog systems. They planned ahead, had already bought the digital stuff and couldn't see the point of having that investment simply sit there and do NOTHING. I don't think they got too many complaints and this is a broadcast system that blankets the entire state from Omaha (big city) to Valentine (where the cows outnumber the people). My point is, it was not a small investment in time or money.
