WGBH-TV coverage after August 2

[Bob DeMattia]

All of that may be true, but what they will definitely lose is people who
are viewing off-air with receiving equipment
that cannot pick up the VHF-LO signal.   Maybe some of those people will
switch to live streaming, but people
viewing off-air already have that option and thus far haven't felt inclined
to avail themselves of that option.

BTW, I'm live streaming now in NH where off-air is not an option.  The
picture quality does not compare to off-air.

-Bob

On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:48 AM Ken VanTassell <kenwvt@gmail.com> wrote:

> I am going to disagree. Cord cutting is becoming rampant, people are
> really sick of paying huge cable bills. There is a non-profit called
> locast.org that has a roku app with the local Boston stations for free (5
> per month suggested donation). I know several people using this. I think we
> have resurgent times for OTA TV ahead.
>
> -Ken
>
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:46 AM Bob DeMattia <bob.bosra@demattia.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Not to mention many off-air viewers are probably using UHF-only antennas.
>> Even if they have VHF antennas, the only DTV in this area on VHF up until
>> now was
>> on VHF-HI.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:39 AM Norm Pierce <npierce.aq3h@dappermapper.com
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > After a lifetime of watching Channel 2, I'm wondering if those days are
>> > numbered.
>> >
>> > Looking at the application for their construction permit for the new RF
>> > channel 5 assignment [1], it appears that the WGBH engineers have done
>> > their best to give the strongest signal that the FCC rules allow them to
>> > do on that channel.
>> >
>> > According to the "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet [2], the baseline
>> > population served by WGBH-TV, as limited by terrain, is given as
>> > 7,633,586.  In WGBH's application for a construction permit for the new
>> > RF channel 5 assignment, they give a slightly higher number of 7,669,250
>> > because of the change of tower, and the fact that they were able to
>> > increase the ERP from 5.3 kW to 6.7 kW without exceeding the geographic
>> > coverage area of the largest station within the same market (see
>> > §73.622(f)(5)) -- something they are apparently allowed to do because
>> > the proposed coverage contour may extend beyond that of the CCRPN
>> > parameters for a station that changes bands (see §73.3700(b)(1)(iii)).
>> >
>> > But even with the higher ERP, does anyone think that the population
>> > served won't actually be much smaller than it currently is, given the
>> > problems with DTV on VHF?  Will it really reach an over-the-air audience
>> > slightly larger than it currently does on RF channel 19, and comparable
>> > to channels 4, 5, and 7, or do the above coverage numbers suffer from
>> > gross optimism?
>> >
>> > Norm Pierce
>> >
>> >
>> > [1]
>> WGBH-TV_reassignment_initial_minor_mod_application_ENG_06-18-2017.pdf
>> >
>> >
>> https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/api/download/attachment/25076f915c78b6bf015cbcb83aa224c3
>> >
>> > [2] "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet"
>> >
>> >
>> https://data.fcc.gov/download/incentive-auctions/Transition_Files/Post_Auction_Baseline.xlsx
>> >
>> > "Incentive Auction Closing and Channel Reassignment Public Notice"
>> > (CCRPN) (DA 17-314)
>> > https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-17-314A1.pdf
>> >
>> >
>>
>