SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Deadline Hollywood reports that the U.S. has sold rights to use radio-frequency spectrum in what is called an incentive auction. Television stations now using those rights will be paid to give them up.
Some 175 stations will collect $10.05 billion for agreeing to relinquish 84 MHz of spectrum. And 50 buyers committed $19.8 billion, and will get to use 70 MHz. (The remaining 14 MHz will go to wireless mics and unlicensed use.)
A blog post by the Philadelphia Inquirer said that a group representing the broadcasting industry was critical of the plan, which gives the winning stations 39 months to change frequencies in a process called repacking:
The National Association of Broadcasters says that the 39 months is arbitrary and should be rethought.
"The complexity of this thing is beyond daunting," NAB spokesman Dennis Wharton said on Thursday. "It will make the switch to digital from analog look like a walk in the park."
Additional coverage:
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 15 2017, @01:48PM (1 child)
isn't viewership level dropping like a rock?
(Score: 3, Informative) by butthurt on Saturday April 15 2017, @02:23PM
As I understand it, the spectrum was bought from television stations and was sold for what are likely to be other uses. The largest purchase was made by T-Mobile USA, a cellular network operator (it's the U.S. arm of Deutsche Telekom).
(Score: 3, Informative) by Thexalon on Saturday April 15 2017, @01:51PM
Create a new network that covers the UHF bands across the country, and put Weird Al in charge of programming. That way, we'll be finally able to see such great films as Conan the Librarian.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by tnt118 on Saturday April 15 2017, @02:19PM (4 children)
One thing I found surprising -- some stations are being moved despite not (strictly speaking) needing to be. I know of some VHF that are moving down and their existing spectrum is going to another UHF station that is currently in the "sold" range. It must have to do with interference between stations in different markets. Also they've laid out ten (or was it nine?) rounds of coordinated movements to get from start to finish successfully. Folks will get quite used to rescanning on their TVs.
I think I like it here.
(Score: 1) by Trip on Saturday April 15 2017, @02:24PM (2 children)
Any station that's being moved needed to be moved for interference reasons.
And the ten phases had a hard limit that the stations in a given market could only be spread across two of those phases to limit the number of rescans. So Boston is split across phases 4 and 8, for example, while all of Los Angeles is in phase 2.
(Score: 2) by tnt118 on Saturday April 15 2017, @02:35PM (1 child)
I still feel like something more is going on. I get that avoiding interference is intricate but if I'm going to be moved from channel 10 to 8, just so someone else can have channel 10 (at the same power) I'm fairly sure you could have just given them channel 8 in the first place.
I think I like it here.
(Score: 1) by Trip on Saturday April 15 2017, @02:48PM
What's the specific case you're wondering about? I can probably explain it.
(Score: 3, Informative) by tnt118 on Saturday April 15 2017, @02:29PM
A total of 175 stations stations broadcasters won bids and will give up their spectrum, the FCC said in a statement on Thursday. The agency said that 30 stations will receive money for moving to a lower channel, and 133 others will give up their licenses, with many intending to remain on the air under channel sharing agreements with other stations. Twelve stations did not indicate that they planned to channel share — raising the prospect that they would go dark.
As part of the process of clearing the spectrum, 957 stations that did not put their spectrum up for bid will still get new channel assignments, with the first group of stations scheduled to move on Nov. 30, 2018.
http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/fcc-incentive-auction-10-billion-1202030079/ [variety.com]
I think I like it here.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by kaszz on Saturday April 15 2017, @03:03PM (1 child)
Better yet lend the spectrum to media outlets that have restraints on size so the spectrum can be used to counter the owner concentration. Other than that, real cheap internet would also be nice. Just giving it to another cellphone oligopoly just seems like unproductive.
(Score: 3, Informative) by butthurt on Saturday April 15 2017, @09:23PM
Although much of it was bought by those large companies, the Deadline Hollywood story says "14 MHz will go to wireless mics and unlicensed use."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 16 2017, @11:09AM
The remaining 14 MHz will go to wireless mics and unlicensed use.
I wonder if there will be something like citizens band available then.
EG: Australia has CB in HF and UHF and the UHF band can do more power than FRS.