Posted by bmcswain on 11/28/05 15:23

Richard,

You are correct. It's not necessarily HDTV but just a digital
broadcast.

And correct again: The Federal Gov is going to pay you $30 toward the
purchase of a convertor box (about $60).

An unanswered question: I have 3 TV's in my house and 3 more in my
beach rental house. Does that mean I've go $180 budgeted to me or just
$30?

Why is this happening? Digital signals take up less bandwidth to
broadcast the same program versus what an analog signal uses. When the
Analog TV bandwidth is manditorily abandoned in 2009, the federal
governement will re-lease/sell the former analog frequency range. They
stand to mak about $30 Billion.

Re: Digital but Not necessarily HDTV
I wonder why a station would spend money to broadcast a digital signal
that is not HD quality. They will have to have all the equipment to
create HD to be competitive.

Given that scenario: the oldest station in Charlotte that was one of
the first FCC test stations to broadcast HDTV over the air, has never
had a quality STV signal that was receiveable via rabbit ears. So the
answer probably is: Even though mandated, we're not spending a single
dime more than we have to. No one uses rabbit ears anyway.

[Back to original message]