backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 69 comment(s) - last by Oregonian2.. on Oct 19 at 2:14 PM


NTIA Administrator and Assistant Commerce Secretary John Kneuer, right, gets a demo of LG's new digital-to-analog converter box from LG Electronics USA Vice President John I. Taylor.  (Source: PRNewsFoto/LG Electronics USA Inc.)
The Korean manufacturer received approval for its subsidized TV converter box, among the first in a 2008 government program that pundits predict will be "a real mess."

The federal program to provide free digital TV converters to millions of Americans took another step forward this week with the approval of the first certified converter box designed by a major electronics maker.

LG Electronics got the green light for it TV converter design from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), a U.S. Department of Commerce agency charged with reviewing and certifying the digital-to-analog converters. It is the first such design from a major supplier to pass muster with the agency, paving the way for a new crop of subsidized devices that will allow conventional analog TVs to receive digital broadcasts. In late September, another Korean manufacturer, Digital Stream Technology Inc., announced that its two converter models, the DigitalSTREAM D2A1D10 and DigitalSTREAM D2A1D20, had also been approved by the NTIA.

The converters are a key component of the federally mandated DTV switchover to all-digital TV programming in 2009. At that time, American TV viewers who rely on over-the-air (OTA) broadcast signals for TV reception will no longer be able to view local television programming on older analog TVs without using a digital converter equipped with an ATSC tuner.

Viewers who depend solely on antennas for TV reception are clearly in the minority, yet their numbers are still significant, according to TV industry pundits such as Phillip Swann, president of TV Predictions.com. Officials are estimating that about 20 million U.S. homes receive OTA broadcasts, Swann says, which amounts to more than 20 percent of all TV viewing households in the country.

"A lot of homes have analog TVs that are going to need converter boxes to continue to receive television broadcasts," he said. That means demand for the digital TV converters will be high -- along with demand for the government-issued $40 coupons that will become available on Jan. 1, 2008.

The coupons for TV converters will be free for the asking to anyone, regardless of their income level or citizenship status, Swann said. As a result, he expects the $1.5 billion digital TV subsidy program to become "a political football," as partisan rhetoric heats up in advance of the next presidential election.

"There is no income threshold. You could be Rockefeller or an illegal alien," Swann said. "All you have to do is say, `Give me my TV converter coupon.'

"One of the concerns is that the people who really need them may not get them."

Another concern is that the poorest Americans -- who are most likely to rely on old analog sets and OTA reception, often because they can't afford subscriptions to cable or satellite TV programming -- will find that the $40 coupons aren't enough. "In most cases, the converters are going to cost $60 to $70, so you'll still need to shell out $20 to $30 at the store," Swann said.

The giveaway is not great news for retailers or consumer electronics manufacturers either, according to Swann. Swann predicts that Wal-Mart will be among major retailers that choose not to carry the products.

"No CE company or retailer is going to make a lot of money on a $50 or $60 product," Swann says. "They want people to come in and buy TVs but not these (inexpensive) products."

Since the coupons cannot be used to buy anything else, such as going toward the purchase of a digital TV with a built-in ATSC tuner, the opportunity to upgrade coupon holders will be meager, he said.

With some major retailers refusing to participate in the program, and the political in-fighting and finger pointing that is sure to ensue, "It's going to be a mess next year," Swann said, "I guarantee that."



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

kinda funny
By darkpaw on 10/15/2007 9:26:48 AM , Rating: 6
quote:
Another concern is that the poorest Americans -- who are most likely to rely on old analog sets and OTA reception, often because they can't afford subscriptions to cable or satellite TV programming -- will find that the $40 coupons aren't enough. "In most cases, the converters are going to cost $60 to $70, so you'll still need to shell out $20 to $30 at the store," Swann said.


Funny thing is most of the poor people I know (I'm related to quite a few) would sooner pay for cable then buy clothes for their kids.




RE: kinda funny
By Pale Rider on 10/15/2007 9:32:58 AM , Rating: 3
Most of the poor people I know already have an HDTV with a digital tuner and don't need the box! They also can't afford to put gas in their car!


RE: kinda funny
By Pale Rider on 10/16/2007 11:21:37 AM , Rating: 3
Ohhh. Eated down for calling it like I see it. I guess I offended some poor shmucks who are so far in debt they can't drive to work - BUT they have an HDTV! ZING!


RE: kinda funny
By Samus on 10/16/2007 12:32:24 PM , Rating: 2
PRIORITIES PRIORITIES!


RE: kinda funny
By FITCamaro on 10/15/2007 9:55:24 AM , Rating: 5
I'm just pissed that the federal government is paying for it at all. If you want to watch TV fine, but it isn't the governments responsibility to provide you the means. I must have missed in our laws where it says you have the right to watch TV.

Whats next? $500 vouchers so poor people can have computers? Extra taxes on internet service so poor people can have free internet access (like there already is for phones)?

You want to watch TV? Fine. But you should have to pay for the box yourself or do without. And yes, often times you see poor people with brand new cell phones, $3000 rims on a hunk of junk, and their kids barely have clothes and they live in a shack. But hey, life was hard for them so they deserve free stuff.


RE: kinda funny
By cobalt42 on 10/15/2007 10:51:18 AM , Rating: 5
I think the logic is that the government still views television (with free, over-the-air broadcast) as the most common way to disseminate information to the masses, including things like presidential broadcasts, tornado warnings, city council public meetings, etc. Computer subsidies actually make sense in this regard because they're more of a pull media than a push.


RE: kinda funny
By cobalt42 on 10/15/2007 10:52:10 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry, I mean computers make *LESS* sense than OTA TV.


RE: kinda funny
By euclidean on 10/15/2007 6:06:33 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly...plus they were the ones deciding to take away the analog broadcasts...so if they take something away from someone, shouldn't they help them replace what they're missing? eh.


RE: kinda funny
By surt on 10/15/2007 11:05:42 AM , Rating: 1
It's the government's responsibility because they license the airwaves. They essentially made a promise, years back, that if you invested in a tv, you'd be able to watch television. Now they're pulling the rug out from under those who made that investment. It seems pretty reasonable that the government spend some of the licensing revenue they're getting from those airwaves on fulfilling the promises they made in order to make the airwaves licensable.


RE: kinda funny
By zombiexl on 10/15/2007 12:32:55 PM , Rating: 3
People have known this w3as coming since the mid-late 90's. Its not like they said ok next week were turning off all analog TV signals.

People (myself included) have continued to invest in TV's without the digital tuner, why does that become a burden on the tax payers?

If you pay taxes and are not downright livid about how your tax dollars are being spent then please dont vote in the next election becuase obviously you dont understand how out of hand these "special programs" have gotten.


RE: kinda funny
By Kuroyama on 10/15/2007 12:59:43 PM , Rating: 2
My parents have used the same TV for the last 15 years and it still works just fine (they only watch broadcast TV). If the government breaks my parent's TV, that wasn't doing anyone else any harm, then they should help fix what they broke, especially when it'll only require a fraction of the oodles of money they'll make off selling the analog spectrum.


RE: kinda funny
By dever on 10/15/2007 3:19:04 PM , Rating: 4
OK, then I should be able to get $80 tax credit for not redeeming "my" coupons.

Pay for what you use. Money from "the government" is just money from your neighbor. Even though I only have OTA tv, I refuse to accept this handout.

My parents don't have cable either, and I'll be encouraging them not to use this handout. Everyone, have a little respect for your fellow citizen and pay for your own entertainment.


RE: kinda funny
By zombiexl on 10/15/2007 4:30:01 PM , Rating: 2
Finally someone else who isnt a socialist speaks up.


RE: kinda funny
By Oregonian2 on 10/15/2007 5:06:18 PM , Rating: 2
I'm very non-socialist but don't have a problem with the coupons. One could argue that the government's cutting off analog transmission and therefore requiring people to shell out $70 for a converter just to maintain the status quo is in effect a tax. It is forcing people to shell out money as a result of their passing a law. If they didn't provide the coupons I could see a class action lawsuit brewing (resulting in the coupons). If this were completely free-market driven, I'd perhaps have trouble with the coupons, but it isn't -- it's all heavily government driven (even if I think it's a good idea for them to have done it and am glad personally of it).


RE: kinda funny
By dever on 10/16/2007 3:04:51 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, I agree that it is in response to a government driven mandate. But I don't believe that necessitates additional market interference. The beauty of the free market is that costs are tightly integrated with benefits. You benefit you pay. The further you separate costs from benefits, the more disfunctional the system.


RE: kinda funny
By Oregonian2 on 10/16/2007 7:56:12 PM , Rating: 2
I agree with you philosophically, but the coupons are a partial "undo" of the mandated upgrades to analog receivers, and being undone by those who made the mandate. The portion (if any) that's user-paid for the converters is a payment for no benefit other than getting back what the government took away. So it's not really a free market sell/buy device being talked about when looked at on a broad scale.

On the bright side, the coupons are a LOT better than the government contracting them to be built and distributing them themselves (I'm a bit surprised they didn't do that along with the massive mess that undoubtedly would occur).


RE: kinda funny
By FITCamaro on 10/15/2007 11:05:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
They essentially made a promise, years back, that if you invested in a tv, you'd be able to watch television.


Standard def TV standards were established like 40 f*ing years ago. So are we not supposed to progress technologically because people are poor and can't afford a $50-60 box? Who's fault again is it that they're poor? Oh right its white people's or the governments. Sorry, keep forgetting that. We all know its not their fault that they didn't study in school and make anything of themselves so that they could get a good job and not be poor.


RE: kinda funny
By Kuroyama on 10/15/2007 11:31:58 PM , Rating: 2
Why don't you lay off on the "angry white man" thing a bit. Your incessant hostility sounds like a melanin-deficient version of Al Sharpton. Perhaps both of you should learn that it's perfectly possible to express your views without blaming other people for everything you don't like in life.


RE: kinda funny
By FITCamaro on 10/16/2007 9:08:48 AM , Rating: 1
I wasn't trying to say that African Americans are the reason. But yes a larger proportion of blacks in this country are poor than whites. And yes, where I grew up, thats who's complained about this kind of stuff. Doesn't mean they're the only ones though. There's plenty of whites, hispanics, asians, etc. who are poor in this country and expect the government to give them handouts.

I'm pissed at anyone who's poor regardless of race, gender, etc. and think that the government owes them something. Or that it's someone else's fault for them being in the situation they're in.

I don't consider myself an "angry white man". I consider myself an angry middle class American who's tired of people expecting the government to take care of them.