Abc1 Soon To Be Hd ?

[ckent]

Nah I'm watching Nine HD via Sydney, and it is far more smoothed out than Ten HD.  But the bitrate difference supports that.

I'm honestly shocked that I'm being challenged about News24 being an SD-only operation.  If you were on this forum in 2010 when it launched, you would have seen consensus.

Anyway the real argument should be about Sky News Live HD, Business HD and Election HD, all of which are 100% upscaled content — for no particular reason, except costs I suppose, but if so why do they spend money on an HD channel — though when I say 100%, I need to subtract the news ticker on the bottom and logo up top.  I guess their intention is to go to real HD but it's been a year now.  Crikey.

[MichaelCPE]

3 hours ago, ckent said:

I'm honestly shocked that I'm being challenged about News24 being an SD-only operation.  If you were on this forum in 2010

Sorry, but you really expect every reader of this current thread to have read all the discussion from 2010?

As I said before, I suspect that you are right that ABC24 was never real HD. All I'm pointing out is that it is very reasonable for someone to think that this is unlikely. After all, it is a very silly thing for the ABC to have done, so could they really have been that silly?

[pgdownload]

6 hours ago, ckent said:

Incorrect.  The entire point of the HD quota 2003-2013 was to enforce HD native content.  The networks had to submit a list of content they were acquiring and displaying in HD without any downconversion in the chain.  To total 1040 hours a year (which was quite easy, even when 7mate + GEM started … though until GEM's setup was finalised, they simulcast Today 6am-9am to help get over the line).

ABC and SBS always had an exclusion explicitly *allowing* upconversion because … reasons?  They claimed they were poor, but honestly they used to have an ideological aversion to HD to help their multichannel-loving management.  SBS have long since moved on, but ABC is only being dragged into the late 1990s HDTV out of embarrassment with so many 4K TVs now getting out there.

I stand corrected. The 1040 hours ended up being a joke (no one ever bothered checking and it wasn't really clear what would happen if 1040 hours wasn't met (HD advertising did count towards the quota though.) 

I think you're being a bit harsh on the ABC. The commercial networks always had access to more $ to invest in HD and they also all decided to go multi channelling over HD after a brief dalliance with HD channels. The ABCs basic remit is to provide content that the commercial channels won't (for what ever reason). Supplying 1 channel in HD versus 2 in SD just limits its ability to tell stories. 

Regards

Peter Gillespie

[MichaelCPE]

13 minutes ago, pgdownload said:

Supplying 1 channel in HD versus 2 in SD just limits its ability to tell stories. 

I cant' work you out Peter. 

For a start the new HD channel is being done without ending ABC 24, ABC2, or ABC ME.

Secondly, it is pretty clear that the ABC has major problems paying for decent content. Just look at how much is repeats on all channels. And of course one of the problems with much of the ABC1 is that it doesn't meet the ABC's charter and and is similar to what the commercial channels do provide.

[robertr]

15 hours ago, ckent said:

Nah I'm watching Nine HD via Sydney, and it is far more smoothed out than Ten HD.  But the bitrate difference supports that.

I'm honestly shocked that I'm being challenged about News24 being an SD-only operation.  If you were on this forum in 2010 when it launched, you would have seen consensus.

Anyway the real argument should be about Sky News Live HD, Business HD and Election HD, all of which are 100% upscaled content — for no particular reason, except costs I suppose, but if so why do they spend money on an HD channel — though when I say 100%, I need to subtract the news ticker on the bottom and logo up top.  I guess their intention is to go to real HD but it's been a year now.  Crikey.

i was thinking the same this morning after watching about 30 seconds of HD Sky News UK Live,picture quality is disgraceful,I just scratch my head in bewilderment as to how far backward we have gone when in 2002 so much was promised.

 

My hatred for the Seven Network is intense they started the rot & festered the sore that is HD for the past 14 years.

[laurie]

It has nothing to do with quality more to do with quantity same at Foxtel lets jam the channels in and squeeze every bit !!

 

cheers laurie

[robertr]

39 minutes ago, laurie said:

It has nothing to do with quality more to do with quantity same at Foxtel lets jam the channels in and squeeze every bit !!

 

cheers laurie

That's fine however it is not HD (Sky News UK) much rather it in HD not SD

[alanh]

pgdownload,

I have checked the ABC has never had anyone with any hint of any engineering qualifications on the board as far as I went back which was back to the beginning of the century.

Managing Directors as well have had no qualifications or idea about technical matters. They have all been interested in minimising engineering budgets and contracting the ABC to become the Sydney Broadcasting Corporation. It does not exist if it is North of Hornsby, West of Penrith or South of Sutherland.

You are right they have been forced to buy HD equipment on the rare occasions they have bought equipment because SD equipment has not been available for many years. There has been no planned upgrade to HD particularly MPEG-4. They opposed it in submissions to enquiries into TV by Department of Communications/ACMA. They always follow never lead! They are yet to broadcast HD programs this time round. Unlike the commercials who produce their state news in HD, the ABC is not buying any HD studio equipment or pay the extra to bring HD signals back to MediaHub. Better image quality has never been a priority of management particularly if they have to pay for it.

They were dragged in to DAB+ by Commercial Radio Australia.

They have no idea about transmission technology because it has always been contracted to PMG/Telstra/Broadcast Australia. When commercial FM radio licences were being sold for over a million dollars each the ABC was forced to use FM in some regional areas but would not use it for Local Radio in capital cities which are their highest rating stations. They thought they would loose listeners! So now they are trying to convince listeners to pay Telstra/Optus/Vodaphone to listen to radio on mobile phones. If they had bitten the FM bullet years ago, most will receive FM directly and they would not have to pay for all internet equipment to stream programs. There are no mobile phones which have AM. 

Their latest stuff up is the closure of HF broadcasting, look at their rediculous reasons, no promotion in the affected areas, and they pull this stunt when all the politicians are on holidays!

The poor management continues.

Alanh

[mello yello]

the only reason Foxtel add a HD on the end of the program name is so they can milk their customers for the $10 for "HD"

[metal beat]

2 hours ago, mello yello said:

the only reason Foxtel add a HD on the end of the program name is so they can milk their customers for the $10 for "HD"

It does look a lot better thou - in another world. I almost refuse to watch SD on Foxtel with my tele 

Don't know why all of Foxtel is not HD and be done with it.

[davmel]

13 minutes ago, metal beat said:

Don't know why all of Foxtel is not HD and be done with it.

Foxtel doesn't want to upgrade all the older SD STB's all at once. They are waiting until natural attrition removes the remaining stock out in the field. Only when the last box is switched off will anything be done to change to HD. But as long as they are milking customers for a BS "HD" fee there is no incentive to change. SD will be around for a long time yet. Heck, they can't even be bothered to stream any channels online in HD. Foxtel are just a pathetic joke. They had good potential many years ago when they started HD but took the cheap way out and compressed more channels onto their transponders, then they pissed off many including myself by locking out 3rd party decoders. They never got another cent from me after that and never will. Financially supporting Foxtel by subscribing to them is just encouraging them to deliver substandard TV.

[metal beat]

5 hours ago, davmel said:

Foxtel doesn't want to upgrade all the older SD STB's all at once. They are waiting until natural attrition removes the remaining stock out in the field. Only when the last box is switched off will anything be done to change to HD. But as long as they are milking customers for a BS "HD" fee there is no incentive to change. SD will be around for a long time yet. Heck, they can't even be bothered to stream any channels online in HD. Foxtel are just a pathetic joke. They had good potential many years ago when they started HD but took the cheap way out and compressed more channels onto their transponders, then they pissed off many including myself by locking out 3rd party decoders. They never got another cent from me after that and never will. Financially supporting Foxtel by subscribing to them is just encouraging them to deliver substandard TV.

 

  So tell me where do you see all the HD sports when one is boycotting Foxtel?

[MrC]

7 hours ago, davmel said:

 Foxtel are just a pathetic joke. They never got another cent from me after that and never will. Financially supporting Foxtel by subscribing to them is just encouraging them to deliver substandard TV.

Can you tell us what you really think about FoxTel? 

[pc10]

On ‎9‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 4:14 PM, ckent said:

Okay well I hope you're right, in which case it should look bloody excellent by now.  Who can believe, there was a time when SBS used to wave around 576p as real HD (regurgitating the propaganda from Seven) but since then their HD chops have really shown off.  I can't give a stuff how awful their SD channels look, and even though I might like some of the Viceland shows, their brand-mark went to 90% opaque soon after launch and it's just management ego getting in the way (literally) of actual content.  SBS seems like they're actually taking HD seriously.  Dammit I have to even admit Seven's HD channel is not bad at all PQ, despite their Melbourne Cup footage (in Sydney) being a complete embarrassment for 2016.

the macro blocking and pixilation was only sorted a couple of weeks ago - definitely looking a lot better now.  VAST has also gone to full HD 1920 X 1080 MPEG 4

[pgdownload]

On 12/9/2016 at 11:05 PM, MichaelCPE said:

For a start the new HD channel is being done without ending ABC 24, ABC2, or ABC ME.

That's my point. The ABC obviously prefer to multi channel over HD. If they dropped any of the SD channels then they'd have plenty of bandwidth to boost the HD channel PQ. But that's assuming bandwidth is the limiter here and not (as you suspect) that they're just polishing SD content, which can only go so far. In the end this change does lay the ground work for having a quality HD channel. As you say, hopefully the next phase in this transition kicks off in the New Year.

Regards

Peter Gillespie

[pgdownload]

On 12/10/2016 at 2:47 PM, alanh said:

pgdownload,

I have checked the ABC has never had anyone with any hint of any engineering qualifications on the board as far as I went back which was back to the beginning of the century. Better image quality has never been a priority of management particularly if they have to pay for it.

Alanh

Well, leaving aside the radio mistakes, they do seem to be muddling along.

The ABC (and SBS) lead multi channeling (mostly cause they were the only channels allowed to do it initially) and obviously had to do much with at times with a very proscribed budget (new channels and better PQ wouldn't bring in more revenue unlike for the commercials). iView was also pretty successful in opening up online viewing (something the commercial channels are still doing pretty badly). Putting 24 hour news on the HD channel always seemed like a waste but they're the first station to simulcast their main channel in MPEG4 (a move you especially should be happy with?).

FWIW better PQ has not been a priority for any of the FTA stations (And people are complaining above about Foxtel HD for that matter). The ABC ain't perfect (and surely could have pushed harder in leading some area, but it does seem to slowly be moving in the right direction. 

Regards

Peter Gillespie

[alanh]

Pgdowload,

So what has ABC management done right in an engineering sense?

In the latest annual report, the ABC gets an appropriation for transmission costs from the Department of Communications (Broadcast Australia contract covers ABC and SBS transmitters). They gave back $11 million to government, yet there is quite a few FM local radio transmitters radiating mono not stereo because the ABC will not pay Telstra for a stereo program feed to the transmitters!

Multichannelling was a programming decision made available because the DVB-T system is designed to carry multiple program streams was not specified by the ABC. They decided to stop transmitting ABC1 in HD and transfer it to ABC24 and then transmit upscaled SD!

What radio mistakes? For example The ABC was forced to go FM for Northern Tasmania by the ACMA. Their lack of engineering knowledge had them promoting ABC local radio as 97.1 for the very high powered Mt Barrow transmitter, however there is quite a number of translators including 102.7 in Launceston city, the biggest audience but this was not promoted along with a number of other translators along the coasts.. As a result when their AM transmitter was switched off they lost many listeners because they did not know to tune to any other frequency. The should have just promoted themselves as ABC Northern Tasmania and the problem would have been solved, because listeners would have just gone searching. Tha ACMA forced the change to FM along with all Launceston commercial stations. In Hobart all stations except ABC Hobart and Radio National, PNN and a pair of community stations are on FM.

Why does the ABC persist with brand ABC classic FM when large portions of their Local radio and Radio National transmitters are on FM including very high powered ones in Victoria , NSW Coastal including Illawarra and in Coastal Qld, including Gold/Sunshine coast and of course Darwin. Should they not just call it ABC Classics because of the prolific use of FM by all broadcasters including the ABC? They don't call Triple J JJJ FM!

The first to transmit MPEG4 was the 7 network with TV4me and racing.com along with AAC sound. They also transmitted 7flix in MPEG-4 for a while.This was then followed by HD MPEG-4 primary channel simulcasts by all the capital city commercials (with the exception still of 7 in Perth, Sydney, and Brisbane who simulcast 7Mate instead). The Nine and TEN simulcasts however have stuck with the old AC3 sound and not the more efficent AAC sound. WINHD, TENHD is also an MPEG-4 simulcasts in some regional areas.

The ABCHD version 2 has been the last to go MPEG-4 in metro areas except for 7 in Perth, Sydney and Brisbane. Even so they are not transmitting HD quality images just upscaled SD, because they have not had a program over the years of upgrading studio facilities to HD. The only exception is MediaHub which is joint owned by ABC and WIN TV and they sell their services to other broadcasters, so they had to be able to offer HD.

Prime7/GWN7/7Qld, all commercial TV on VAST satellite TV in the East and Central Australia is yet to get any HD. VAST has used MPEG-4 from the start for all HD broadcasts, because all VAST receivers are MPEG-4 capable.

SBSHD and ABC24 have and are still MPEG-2

Is Iview such a success? The ABC has to pay to equip it and run it when essentially is is a PVR service, which is available in many TVs and Set top Boxes. The ABC does not pay for the transmitters.

pC9, SBS HD on VAST has always been MPEG-4. The ACMA made any ground based retransmitters in country towns convert the MPEG-4 signals back to MPEG-2 which put extra costs on communities where most were buying MPEG-4 capable TVs. They were among the last sites to transmit digital and by then nearly all TVs were MPEG-4 capable.

Alanh

[pc10]

3 hours ago, alanh said:

Pgdowload,

So what has ABC management done right in an engineering sense?

In the latest annual report, the ABC gets an appropriation for transmission costs from the Department of Communications (Broadcast Australia contract covers ABC and SBS transmitters). They gave back $11 million to government, yet there is quite a few FM local radio transmitters radiating mono not stereo because the ABC will not pay Telstra for a stereo program feed to the transmitters!

Multichannelling was a programming decision made available because the DVB-T system is designed to carry multiple program streams was not specified by the ABC. They decided to stop transmitting ABC1 in HD and transfer it to ABC24 and then transmit upscaled SD!

What radio mistakes? For example The ABC was forced to go FM for Northern Tasmania by the ACMA. Their lack of engineering knowledge had them promoting ABC local radio as 97.1 for the very high powered Mt Barrow transmitter, however there is quite a number of translators including 102.7 in Launceston city, the biggest audience but this was not promoted along with a number of other translators along the coasts.. As a result when their AM transmitter was switched off they lost many listeners because they did not know to tune to any other frequency. The should have just promoted themselves as ABC Northern Tasmania and the problem would have been solved, because listeners would have just gone searching. Tha ACMA forced the change to FM along with all Launceston commercial stations. In Hobart all stations except ABC Hobart and Radio National, PNN and a pair of community stations are on FM.

Why does the ABC persist with brand ABC classic FM when large portions of their Local radio and Radio National transmitters are on FM including very high powered ones in Victoria , NSW Coastal including Illawarra and in Coastal Qld, including Gold/Sunshine coast and of course Darwin. Should they not just call it ABC Classics because of the prolific use of FM by all broadcasters including the ABC? They don't call Triple J JJJ FM!

The first to transmit MPEG4 was the 7 network with TV4me and racing.com along with AAC sound. They also transmitted 7flix in MPEG-4 for a while.This was then followed by HD MPEG-4 primary channel simulcasts by all the capital city commercials (with the exception still of 7 in Perth, Sydney, and Brisbane who simulcast 7Mate instead). The Nine and TEN simulcasts however have stuck with the old AC3 sound and not the more efficent AAC sound. WINHD, TENHD is also an MPEG-4 simulcasts in some regional areas.

The ABCHD version 2 has been the last to go MPEG-4 in metro areas except for 7 in Perth, Sydney and Brisbane. Even so they are not transmitting HD quality images just upscaled SD, because they have not had a program over the years of upgrading studio facilities to HD. The only exception is MediaHub which is joint owned by ABC and WIN TV and they sell their services to other broadcasters, so they had to be able to offer HD.

Prime7/GWN7/7Qld, all commercial TV on VAST satellite TV in the East and Central Australia is yet to get any HD. VAST has used MPEG-4 from the start for all HD broadcasts, because all VAST receivers are MPEG-4 capable.

SBSHD and ABC24 have and are still MPEG-2

Is Iview such a success? The ABC has to pay to equip it and run it when essentially is is a PVR service, which is available in many TVs and Set top Boxes. The ABC does not pay for the transmitters.

pC9, SBS HD on VAST has always been MPEG-4. The ACMA made any ground based retransmitters in country towns convert the MPEG-4 signals back to MPEG-2 which put extra costs on communities where most were buying MPEG-4 capable TVs. They were among the last sites to transmit digital and by then nearly all TVs were MPEG-4 capable.

Alanh

When did I say it had not always been MPEG 4.  My point in the last post was that SBS had recently upgraded from 1440 x 1080 to 1920 x 1080.  SBS was the last of the HD services on VAST to make this adjustment.  One, Imparja Gem and Mate increased the resolution to full hd some time ago.

[pgdownload]

2 hours ago, pc9 said:

When did I say it had not always been MPEG 4.  My point in the last post was that SBS had recently upgraded from 1440 x 1080 to 1920 x 1080.  SBS was the last of the HD services on VAST to make this adjustment.  One, Imparja Gem and Mate increased the resolution to full hd some time ago.

I think he was talking to me

Regards

Peter Gillespie

[BigH]

If anyone turned off their WSS setting to bypass the incorrect 4x3 WSS flag and the resultant incorrect aspect ratio in the ABC24 SD Transport Stream as I suggested earlier in this thread, I’m pleased to inform you that it can now be turned back on as the ABC seem to have corrected it sometime last night to 16x9. Not bad only took 'em a week.      

[ckent]

On 09/12/2016 at 9:50 PM, MichaelCPE said:

Sorry, but you really expect every reader of this current thread to have read all the discussion from 2010?

As I said before, I suspect that you are right that ABC24 was never real HD. All I'm pointing out is that it is very reasonable for someone to think that this is unlikely. After all, it is a very silly thing for the ABC to have done, so could they really have been that silly?

Wow.  Okay.  Well, it was QUITE a **** fest in here in 2010 because of how ridiculous it was, even in 2010.

As for 'every reader' … this forum hasn't really had many new ones since 2001-2003 when they were putting the dvbforum.net.au URL onto slips of paper in the set-top boxes for sale during manufacturer packaging.  I'd be going for a bit of a broader audience appeal over at AusTech, for instance … but here, the assumed knowledge is high.

I'd be happy if that changed, but it's a lot of the old faces around here.

On 10/12/2016 at 0:28 PM, laurie said:

It has nothing to do with quality more to do with quantity same at Foxtel lets jam the channels in and squeeze every bit !!

That doesn't make sense though — if they want to jam in more channels, then turn off the Sky News HD channels.  There's nothing HD on them.

Or just pocket the money saved on satellite bandwidth.  It's not small.

On 10/12/2016 at 3:14 PM, mello yello said:

the only reason Foxtel add a HD on the end of the program name is so they can milk their customers for the $10 for "HD"

Okay … maybe … but it's not much of a sales pitch to Sky News customers when they tune in to find … exactly the same thing as Sky News SD ?

Of course it could be an entire bait-and-switch, but after 12 months, anyone who only got HD for the news could have cancelled the $10 fee long ago.

On 10/12/2016 at 5:30 PM, metal beat said:

It does look a lot better thou - in another world. I almost refuse to watch SD on Foxtel with my tele 

Don't know why all of Foxtel is not HD and be done with it.

Er!!  Tons of technical and financial reasons.  Think about the fact that they (hope to) control EVERY decoder that can watch Foxtel.  If it's not their box, it can't watch it.

Now, having understood that, remember that 10 years ago there were 100% of Foxtel decoders that could ONLY decode SD not HD.

So, for them to go "all HD and be done with it", they would have to go from 100% to zero 0% … and throw away their entire investment in decoder hardware.  And, even more expensively probably, is delivering (and maybe installing) all of them to every single customer.

This isn't like FTA … you can't just get people to buy a shiny new TV and reap the benefits.  It's not automatic.  It's entirely manual, holding the hand of the customer up the entire upgrade path.

On 12/12/2016 at 9:25 AM, pgdownload said:

Putting 24 hour news on the HD channel always seemed like a waste but they're the first station to simulcast their main channel in MPEG4 (a move you especially should be happy with?).

First station to simulcast?  No they're the last (if you don't count SBS, but they've had HD simulcasting the whole time so nobody's disappointed at SBS).

CK.

[ckent]

On 09/12/2016 at 6:39 PM, ckent said:

I'm honestly shocked that I'm being challenged about News24 being an SD-only operation.

Besides anything else, it was really obvious on screen.  4K has been around for a while but really big HDTVs have been quite prolific recently.

[MLXXX]

A few days ago I did some searching and found references to ABC News 24 being in upscaled SD at around the time the service began; but not a lot of discussion about subsequent periods. However none of the sporadic claims I did find for the years 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015 that said that ABC News 24 was merely upscaled SD was challenged/refuted.

I have a memory, and it appears I may be mistaken, of having seen some live studio interviews on ABC News 24 being presented in what appeared to me at the time to be HD visible resolution, and I remember making a mental note along the lines "well at least they can do a live studio broadcast with HD visible resolution if not their usual news broadcasts".   I hasten to add I have very rarely watched ABC News 24 over the years.

There was a report (https://decidertv.com/page/2015/11/18/abc-tv-to-make-the-switch-to-high-definition-in-2016-abctv ) of an interview of ABC Director of Television Richard Finlayson that very strongly suggested material would have been broadcast in HD. Here is a relevant paragraph from the report:

Quote

 

The move to High Definition for the main channel, means ABCNews24 will be switched to an SD Feed. A significant percentage of news packages are currently edited in standard definition to save on production resources, meaning its unlikely many viewers of ABCNews24 will notice the downgrade in broadcast quality.

However a poster in a specialist forum described that suggestion as nonsense (or perhaps "farcical" was the word used). And the poster was not challenged in the specialist forum. Unfortunately I haven't been able to find that post using Google this evening.*

In summary, I can see there have been quite a number of reports in different Australian forums of ABC News24 broadcasting with merely upscaled SD. There appear to have been no specific forum reports (at least none I have come across) of ABC News 24 ever broadcasting with HD visble resolution (i.e. an HD source not downrezzed to SD before broadcast).  And yet in November 2015, comments attributed to ABC Director of Television Richard Finlayson, strongly implied some actual visible HD resolution broadcasting (as per the quote box above)!

Is it really the case that the ABC television service known as "ABC News 24" was transmitted with an HD transmission resolution [1280 x 720 pixels] from mid-2010 to late-2016 with the transmitters around Australia never actually being fed a video stream of native HD program material (that had not been downrezzed to SD [720 x 576 pixels] prior to transmission)? 

______________

* Edit. Now found, as follows:

This statement is farcical: "A significant percentage of news packages are currently edited in standard definition to save on production resources, meaning its unlikely many viewers of ABCNews24 will notice the downgrade in broadcast quality"

News 24 has always been 100% upconverted from 576i and anyone watching it with a real TV could see that it wasn't created in HD.

In effect, the launch of News 24 was the death of HD on ABC, until next year.

The above post of 23rd Nov 2015 appeared in the DISQUS forum, and was not queried or otherwise challenged.

Edited December 16, 2016 by MLXXX

[metal beat]

1 hour ago, ckent said:

Wow.  Okay.  Well, it was QUITE a **** fest in here in 2010 because of how ridiculous it was, even in 2010.

As for 'every reader' … this forum hasn't really had many new ones since 2001-2003 when they were putting the dvbforum.net.au URL onto slips of paper in the set-top boxes for sale during manufacturer packaging.  I'd be going for a bit of a broader audience appeal over at AusTech, for instance … but here, the assumed knowledge is high.

I'd be happy if that changed, but it's a lot of the old faces around here.

That doesn't make sense though — if they want to jam in more channels, then turn off the Sky News HD channels.  There's nothing HD on them.

Or just pocket the money saved on satellite bandwidth.  It's not small.

Okay … maybe … but it's not much of a sales pitch to Sky News customers when they tune in to find … exactly the same thing as Sky News SD ?

Of course it could be an entire bait-and-switch, but after 12 months, anyone who only got HD for the news could have cancelled the $10 fee long ago.

Er!!  Tons of technical and financial reasons.  Think about the fact that they (hope to) control EVERY decoder that can watch Foxtel.  If it's not their box, it can't watch it.

Now, having understood that, remember that 10 years ago there were 100% of Foxtel decoders that could ONLY decode SD not HD.

So, for them to go "all HD and be done with it", they would have to go from 100% to zero 0% … and throw away their entire investment in decoder hardware.  And, even more expensively probably, is delivering (and maybe installing) all of them to every single customer.

This isn't like FTA … you can't just get people to buy a shiny new TV and reap the benefits.  It's not automatic.  It's entirely manual, holding the hand of the customer up the entire upgrade path.

First station to simulcast?  No they're the last (if you don't count SBS, but they've had HD simulcasting the whole time so nobody's disappointed at SBS).

CK.

So if every Foxtel subscriber paid the $10 extra for HD, foxtel would decline their upgrades.

Not

 

Edited December 16, 2016 by metamatic

[pgdownload]

1 hour ago, ckent said:

So, for them to go "all HD and be done with it", they would have to go from 100% to zero 0% … and throw away their entire investment in decoder hardware.  And, even more expensively probably, is delivering (and maybe installing) all of them to every single customer..

Foxtel don't go all HD for many reasons (probably mostly technical) but SD legacy boxes isn't one of them. Foxtel realised a few years ago that getting an IQ box into a household dramatically reduced churn. They've been practically giving away IQ (HD) boxes to anyone and everyone for years.

I'm also intrigued by Foxtels "hope" to control every box that accesses Foxtel. Aside from illegal operations they do, don't they? 

First station to simulcast?  No they're the last (if you don't count SBS, but they've had HD simulcasting the whole time so nobody's disappointed at SBS).

Not the last but yes I hadn't realised most of the major stations had also done this. I still think AlanH should view it as a step in the right direction.

Regards

Peter Gillespie