The beginning of the end of terrestrial [OTA] digital commercial television in Germany?

[J G Miller]

From <http://www.a516digital.COM/2013/01/german-commercial-broadcaster-to-exit.html>

QUOTE

Sunday, 20 January 2013

German Commercial Broadcaster to exit DTT

...

RTL stated it costs 30x more to broadcast terrestrially than it
does for satellite. The broadcaster cited uncertainties over the
future use of frequencies for mobile services across Germany beyond
2020 and the lack of a plan for DTT involving a future migration
across to the DVB-T2 standard.

...

Following the withdrawal of services in Nuremberg last year, RTL will begin
switching off its DTT signal in Munich in the spring and everywhere else
where it still broadcasts terrestrially by the end of 2014.


UNQUOTE

The RTL Germany stations are available across most of Western Europe
being broadcast free to air from Astra 19,2 East for the SD version,
but viewers wishing to see the HD version (including the same regular
commercial breaks) which is encrypted, must buy an HD+ card which
provides access to HD versions of all the major commercial networks.

<http://en.wikipedia.ORG/wiki/HD%2B>

The RTL stations in Germany are owned by RTL Group (the largest commercial
TV corporation in Europe) which has its HQ in Kirchberg, Lëtzebuerg
[Luxembourg], but that is approximately 90% owned by the private Germany
company Bertelsmann AG.

The remaining 10% of stock is traded on the Bourse de Bruxelles
(owned by NYSE Euronext, with NYSE in December 2012 being bought
by Intercontinental Exchange, Incorporated).

[Bert]

Post by J G Miller
RTL stated it costs 30x more to broadcast terrestrially than it
does for satellite.

Instead, they send the bill to their viewers.

Post by J G Miller
The broadcaster cited uncertainties over the
future use of frequencies for mobile services across Germany beyond
2020 and the lack of a plan for DTT involving a future migration
across to the DVB-T2 standard.

So, a lot of their problem is regulatory?

[J G Miller]

Post by Bert
Instead, they send the bill to their viewers.

You forget that for commercial TV, the product is the viewers which
are sold to the advertisers ;)

Post by Bert
So, a lot of their problem is regulatory?

Not a lot but only partly.

The major factor is that only about 10 - 15% of TV viewers in Germany
watch TV from a terrestrial transmitter: most receive their TV programs
from either cable or satellite.

I suspect that their decision to end terrestrial broadcasting
may also have been influenced by a decrease in viewing figures
overall because of the encroachment into Germany by Sky, following
the collapse of Kirch Media and its failed attempt to carve out
a Pay TV market.

RTL Group has always had a very firm business no-nonsense attitude
towards its operations. It gives them adequate resources to get a
service up and running, and a lengthy probation period, but if repeated
attempts to establish a profitable service fail, it wastes no time
in pulling the plug, eg the 2010 sale of [UKofGB&NI] Channel 5
company to pornographer publisher Richard Desmond's Northern & Shell group.

Quite simply put, the bean counters will have done the arithmetic
and calculated that the cost per viewer on terrestrial is just
too high and makes too much of a dent in the profits.

Also with the prospects of increased viewing by IPTV, and competition
from that as well, they clearly decided that there was no future in
terrestrial TV. Similarly for radio, RTL intends to terminate
its main AM radio transmission from Letzebuerg to NRW and BW,
because it sees no future worthwhile profit from that either.

Revenue income for RTL Group in 2011 was € 5,814 billion

[Charlie Hoffpauir]

Post by J G Miller
From <http://www.a516digital.COM/2013/01/german-commercial-broadcaster-to-exit.html>
QUOTE
Sunday, 20 January 2013
German Commercial Broadcaster to exit DTT
...
RTL stated it costs 30x more to broadcast terrestrially than it
does for satellite. The broadcaster cited uncertainties over the
future use of frequencies for mobile services across Germany beyond
2020 and the lack of a plan for DTT involving a future migration
across to the DVB-T2 standard.
...

It kind of makes sense to me. Television is a bandwidth hog, so why
not relagate it to satellite delivery and leave OTA bands available
for portable devices.

Post by J G Miller
Following the withdrawal of services in Nuremberg last year, RTL will begin
switching off its DTT signal in Munich in the spring and everywhere else
where it still broadcasts terrestrially by the end of 2014.
UNQUOTE
The RTL Germany stations are available across most of Western Europe
being broadcast free to air from Astra 19,2 East for the SD version,
but viewers wishing to see the HD version (including the same regular
commercial breaks) which is encrypted, must buy an HD+ card which
provides access to HD versions of all the major commercial networks.
<http://en.wikipedia.ORG/wiki/HD%2B>
The RTL stations in Germany are owned by RTL Group (the largest commercial
TV corporation in Europe) which has its HQ in Kirchberg, Lëtzebuerg
[Luxembourg], but that is approximately 90% owned by the private Germany
company Bertelsmann AG.
The remaining 10% of stock is traded on the Bourse de Bruxelles
(owned by NYSE Euronext, with NYSE in December 2012 being bought
by Intercontinental Exchange, Incorporated).

[J G Miller]

Post by Charlie Hoffpauir
It kind of makes sense to me. Television is a bandwidth hog, so why
not relagate it to satellite delivery and leave OTA bands available
for portable devices.

That is exactly what the cellphone wireless companies are saying,
and in many countries, the broadcast regulatory authorities are agreeing
because then they can "sell off" large portions of the spectrum (currently
in the UHF 700 MHz or 800 MHz) range for short term gain by the government treasuries.


<http://www.theaustralian.com.AU/australian-it/telecommunications/spectrum-sell-off-concern-in-two-horse-race/story-fn4iyzsr-1226521547347

<http://media.ofcom.org.UK/2012/07/24/ofcom-unveils-plans-for-4g-auction-of-the-airwaves/>


Once the cellphone companies have services up and running,
they can then charge customers money for every byte of the
live TV stream (including commercials) downloaded.

It is a win-win situation for all of stockholders.

After all, why watch TV for free, when you can be forced by
the government and media companies to pay to watch it and
redistribute wealth to the pockets of the stockholders?

[(PeteCresswell)]

Post by Charlie Hoffpauir
It kind of makes sense to me. Television is a bandwidth hog, so why
not relagate it to satellite delivery and leave OTA bands available
for portable devices.

Probably makes sense to most people because they have cable or
satellite already.

But, given that most people want access to television, and that
the price for monthly cable/satellite vs free OTA is significant
for people on pensions or other fixed incomes (who are already
being inflated into poverty) it could be viewed as yet another
transfer of wealth from those who already don't have much to
those who have a lot.

[Charlie Hoffpauir]

Post by (PeteCresswell)

Post by Charlie Hoffpauir
It kind of makes sense to me. Television is a bandwidth hog, so why
not relagate it to satellite delivery and leave OTA bands available
for portable devices.

Probably makes sense to most people because they have cable or
satellite already.
But, given that most people want access to television, and that
the price for monthly cable/satellite vs free OTA is significant
for people on pensions or other fixed incomes (who are already
being inflated into poverty) it could be viewed as yet another
transfer of wealth from those who already don't have much to
those who have a lot.

I completely agree with this.... however it seem there is something
fundamentally wrong with the entire model. The idea that OTA is "free"
is wrong (my opinion) because we all pay for it whether we watch it or
not, because it's paid for by advertising, and those doing the
advertising make their return on the advertising investment by sales
of their products and services, to , yes, to us!

Now what's wrong with the model is that we have to pay for satellite
transmission (I have DirecTV for example), and on lots of the content,
I have to put up with Advertising too! So the situation isn't set up
on a technical basis at all, not even on an attempt for an "equitable"
basis. Rather it's based on which group has the lobbyists with the
deepest pockets. And I hate paying "double" for content that I can
only get by satellite.

[(PeteCresswell)]

Post by Charlie Hoffpauir
Now what's wrong with the model is that we have to pay for satellite
transmission (I have DirecTV for example), and on lots of the content,
I have to put up with Advertising too! So the situation isn't set up
on a technical basis at all, not even on an attempt for an "equitable"
basis. Rather it's based on which group has the lobbyists with the
deepest pockets. And I hate paying "double" for content that I can
only get by satellite.

I wonder if part of an OTA elimination agreement in the USA could
include "Public-space" satellite bandwidth.... i.e. a place to
put all the programming that is currently OTA and which would be
unencrypted - the only additional cost to the user being the
receiving apparatus.

[Charlie Hoffpauir]

Post by (PeteCresswell)

Post by Charlie Hoffpauir
Now what's wrong with the model is that we have to pay for satellite
transmission (I have DirecTV for example), and on lots of the content,
I have to put up with Advertising too! So the situation isn't set up
on a technical basis at all, not even on an attempt for an "equitable"
basis. Rather it's based on which group has the lobbyists with the
deepest pockets. And I hate paying "double" for content that I can
only get by satellite.

I wonder if part of an OTA elimination agreement in the USA could
include "Public-space" satellite bandwidth.... i.e. a place to
put all the programming that is currently OTA and which would be
unencrypted - the only additional cost to the user being the
receiving apparatus.

Now that's a great idea! Unfortunately, it looks to me like no
corporate moguls benefit, so it probably has no chance of becoming
fact.

[Rick]

Post by Charlie Hoffpauir
It kind of makes sense to me. Television is a bandwidth hog, so why
not relagate it to satellite delivery and leave OTA bands available
for portable devices.

DVB-T2 using H-265 is the way forward.

[T. Keating]

Post by J G Miller
From <http://www.a516digital.COM/2013/01/german-commercial-broadcaster-to-exit.html>
QUOTE
Sunday, 20 January 2013
German Commercial Broadcaster to exit DTT

...

Post by J G Miller
RTL stated it costs 30x more to broadcast terrestrially than it
does for satellite. The broadcaster cited uncertainties over the
future use of frequencies for mobile services across Germany beyond
2020 and the lack of a plan for DTT involving a future migration
across to the DVB-T2 standard.
...
Following the withdrawal of services in Nuremberg last year, RTL will begin
switching off its DTT signal in Munich in the spring and everywhere else
where it still broadcasts terrestrially by the end of 2014.

All it takes is one big ass CME.. (taking out one or more geo-sync sats),
and they'll be out of business for several years or more..

Sat's malfunction all the time.. Loss of thruster control, gyro failure, power system
failure, transponder failure, you name it, all sorts of nasties can happen.

Heck one day, I wouldn't be surprised if a meteor shower(Persieds,Geminds.Leonids, etc)
take out a dozen sats in single evening.

Seams like a risky bet to put all your horses in one barn..

[meagain]

Post by T. Keating

Post by J G Miller
From <http://www.a516digital.COM/2013/01/german-commercial-broadcaster-to-exit.html>
QUOTE
Sunday, 20 January 2013
German Commercial Broadcaster to exit DTT

...

Post by J G Miller
RTL stated it costs 30x more to broadcast terrestrially than it
does for satellite. The broadcaster cited uncertainties over the
future use of frequencies for mobile services across Germany beyond
2020 and the lack of a plan for DTT involving a future migration
across to the DVB-T2 standard.
...
Following the withdrawal of services in Nuremberg last year, RTL will begin
switching off its DTT signal in Munich in the spring and everywhere else
where it still broadcasts terrestrially by the end of 2014.

All it takes is one big ass CME.. (taking out one or more geo-sync sats),
and they'll be out of business for several years or more..
Sat's malfunction all the time.. Loss of thruster control, gyro failure, power system
failure, transponder failure, you name it, all sorts of nasties can happen.
Heck one day, I wouldn't be surprised if a meteor shower(Persieds,Geminds.Leonids, etc)
take out a dozen sats in single evening.
Seams like a risky bet to put all your horses in one barn..

Furthermore, as the integrated circuit technology changes the electronics in the
satellite become obsolete fairly quickly.

[J G Miller]

Post by T. Keating
Seams like a risky bet to put all your horses in one barn..

True, but just came across this official article with statistic which
helps to explain better why RTL Group are giving up on DVB-t.

From <http://www.rtlgroup.COM/www/htm/home_news.aspx?ID=5485A79C32094859A57C4F82273883C5>

QUOTE

DVB-T programme distribution expires at the end of 2014

...

Although terrestrial transmission began over ten years ago,
the average total market share contribution of DVB-T to
Mediengruppe RTL Deutschland’s channels in 2012 was just
*4.2 per cent*.

Apart from the lack of development prospects, DVB-T is by
far the most expensive and therefore most uneconomical of
all methods of transmission.

The cost per household reached by DVB-T is many times higher
than that of cable or satellite – while simultaneously offering
a much smaller range of channels.

UNQUOTE


In other words the mere 4.2 per cent share is just not worth the effort
for the cost involved.

[DockScience]

Post by J G Miller
DVB-T programme distribution expires at the end of 2014

As the gigawatts of power sent into space by terrestrial VHF/UHF TV
transmission slowly declines, the Earth, after a mere one hundred years of
RF brightness, will fade from the view of the galaxy.

And we wonder why our radio telescopes can't see other civilizations' TV
signals.

[Bert]

Post by DockScience
As the gigawatts of power sent into space by terrestrial VHF/UHF TV
transmission slowly declines, the Earth, after a mere one hundred
years of RF brightness, will fade from the view of the galaxy.

Is the earth really that much of a bright spot?

Remember, those "gigawatt" figures are EIRP, which take into account the
directional characteristics of the antenna pattern, which usually don't
include "up."

How far can a signal travel before it's indistinguishable from the
background noise?

[DockScience]

Post by Bert

Post by DockScience
As the gigawatts of power sent into space by terrestrial VHF/UHF TV
transmission slowly declines, the Earth, after a mere one hundred
years of RF brightness, will fade from the view of the galaxy.

Is the earth really that much of a bright spot?
Remember, those "gigawatt" figures are EIRP, which take into account the
directional characteristics of the antenna pattern, which usually don't
include "up."
How far can a signal travel before it's indistinguishable from the
background noise?
--

Unless the signals are pointing DOWN, sideways in any direction IS up, but
out of the ecliptic plane, which I guess does make them a bit less visible
to the bulk of the Milky Way some of the time.

Individually, the signals aren't that significant, too little power over too
wide a band.

But in agregate, the many thousands of TV and radio transmitters
transmitting on fairly narrow broadcast bands should be fairly bright.