Because it is up to the broadcasters determine when they make the jump, knowing they will lose some audience with it. We are already seeing some new residential developments not even have aerial connections which used to be standard.
The other reality was that the broadcasters finally believed that there was enough MPEG-4 television sets out in the wild by 2015. So they could start using MPEG-4 for HD and still have enough bandwidth to keep all their existing multi-channels.
Prior to that with MPEG-2 they were running a single MPEG-2 HD channel that was being used as a multi-channel (ie. 7mate HD, Gem HD, One HD, ABC News 24 HD).
Maintaining multi-channels was their priority in the MPEG-2 era so from about 2009 to 2015, most HD channels were multi-channels and not the main channel.
1 Like
I donât get why 1 isnât HD and 15 the SD simulcast tbh. Or yâknow - dump the SD simulcast
2 Likes
They only very recently switched 1 to be SDâŚ
2 Likes
Why is Ten HD always 5.1 Dolby Digital. Are ads also in 5.1 in other areas like they are on Tasmania TDT. They must be just airing 2.0 with fake 5.1 for most content. Is the reason simply to stop AV receivers havign to change format causing gaps in audio?
Do any other metro channels 9/7 air anything in 5.1 anymore. I have only ever seen 5.1 in recent times from TDT Ten HD in Tasmania.
1 Like
NIne metro is Dolby 5.1 permanently. 10 Drama and 10 Comedy as well.
1 Like
The fake 5.1 annoys me cause when people in a show are talking you can hear the voices leaking into the L&R channels with like a ghosting echoing effect
1 Like
The government needs to look at converting DVB-T to DVB-T2 and reserving some of the spectrum for subscription services.
The commercial FTA model is no longer viable.
SVOD, BVOD and DVB-I requires an expensive internet plan and uses too much bandwidth.
It will be a shame to force everyone onto an internet plan to view television.
They tested DVB-T2 with 4k in Sydney a few years back.
The reluctance for FTA networks to even go MPEG4 only on DVB-T shows that there isnât confidence that their required audience for advertisers has the equipment for it that let alone DVB-T2.
TV could have been delivered via NBN (like it is over Opticomm) but Foxtel wanted to the only paid provider, so it died.
The likelihood that any network would want to switch to DVB-T2 is slimmer and slimmer as time goes on. The terrestrial TV audience is shrinking and the ones who are likely still rusted on are unlikely to have or know about DVB-T2.
The rest of the audience is watching via BVOD or social media where they get be given targeted ads.
The only thing that could force their hand is if the bandwidth currently used for TV could be used for other telecommunications that earns more money.
3 Likes
As on-line delivery is very much into addressable advertising, that would not suit their business model if using RF spectrum to deliver a single broadcast market wide program which can only support a single broadcast stream TVC inventory unlike on-line which can split many ways. It wonât happen. Sadly, the reverse will happen where DVB-T RF distribution will get turned off replaced by on-line delivery only. This currently a major topic of discussion in the UK right now. DVB-T2 will not proceed as the economics are no longer there for it as the FTA advertising pie keeps shrinking at an accelerating rate now.
1 Like
I donât think thereâs a future in OTA distribution of subscription television - Igloo in NZ failed a decade back when the internet streaming situation was less developed than it is now, and that had the advantage of consumers being used to that style of operation from the old Sky UHF service, as well as the much lower amount of transmission sites.
Igloo didnât have sports, which might be the one differentiating factor - but I donât think the household paying enough for the kind of price point any subscription sports package would be in would be the same one which wouldnât have any decent internet service.
Foxtel itself will be trying to wean off full satellite, soon it might be cheaper to do a deal with Starlink to supply a limited internet connection and stream the content than paying for DVB-S2 delivery for the small number of households that donât have internet, likewise with the government funding both VAST and the NBN Coâs satellite operations - eventually itâd be worth just supplying a basic internet service over running two sat services.
1 Like
The problem with using DVB-I as the sole medium is it prices many Australians out of the market and may not be economically viable in remote communities.
A quick search on WhistleOut for my address shows that the lowest cost per month for an internet plan is the Optus Plus Everyday Basic 4G Plan, which provides 14 Mbps Download and and 4Mbps Upload. For the first 12 months it is $39 per month. After 12 months the plan jumps to $59 per month. The customer has to pay $216 for the modem. That speed is barely sufficient for watching 4K Ultra HD.
Countries in Europe are using DVB-T2 to provide FTA and subscription TV.
Is it legal for Foxtel to purchase the 7Mhz mux reserved for community TV and using it to provide FoxLeague, FoxFooty, FoxCricket, Sky News Australia, and a few entertainment channels via DVB-T2?
There are areas in remote Australia that cannot provide IPTV because thereâs too few people to make it economically viable. Foxtel stopped supplying Kayo and Binge in some remote areas for this reason.
DVB-I is not as robust as DVB-T2 during a natural disaster.
Donât know much about DVB-I so did search online and found this: https://dvb-i.tv/deployments/#australia
Potential trials to go ahead in Australia.
New Zealandâs going to deploy it.
The UK uses HbbTV.
So does Australia over DVB-T. HbbTV is not a transmission method.
No.
There simply isnât a viable financial return on investment for broadcasters to do this with ever shrinking advertising revenue. What would be the financial return on investment for doing this. None!
Only way this would happen is with another FTA TV spectrum dividend to recover radio frequencies previously used for analog and digital TV broadcasting and reallocating them for higher-value uses such as 5G/6G mobile telecommunications. Then use the funds from sale of frequencies to pay for the cost of DVB-T2 transmission equipment.
DVB-T2 would give approximately 30% to 50% more network capacity and using the more efficient codecs (like HEVC/H.265), would allow broadcasters to transmit more high-definition or 4K content within the same bandwidth.
However, bear in mind that the last Liberal Government wanted Broadcasters to give up spectrum and start sharing multiplexes in the Media Reform Green Paper (titled Modernising Television Regulation in Australia). Which outlined a strategic plan to overhaul the regulatory framework for free-to-air (FTA) television. Released by the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts. See:
https://www.minterellison.com/articles/modernising-television-regulation-in-australia
Checkout Broadcasterâs etc. submissions to this Media Reform Green Paper here:
The decline in FTA viewership and uptake of SVOD is the precise reason why a subscription terrestrial model using DVB-T2 should be considered.
Seven, Nine and Ten need to generate revenue from another source because the traditional advertising market is in decline.
SVOD is great for drama and movies. It provides people with the option of watching what they want at a time thatâs convenient for them.
However, SVOD is not the right medium for local news and live sport.
The cost of a high speed internet connection and Kayo is becoming unviable. It was reported that Kayo will increase its price by $15 to accommodate the $5.3 million NRL deal theyâre about to sign. The average cost of a 50Mbps internet plan is $86 per month. The cost of Kayo Premium will rise from $45.99 to $60.99. Thatâs $146 per month just to watch NRL, AFL, cricket and F1 in 4K.
Abour 25% of Australians only have a 25Mbps or lower plan. Some Australians in neighbourhoods that are restricted to FTTN are on higher speed plans but cannot download anything about 25Mbps.
Kayo customers routinely talk about their feed cutting out or not being able to log in.
The only viable way of providing sport in 4K to all Australians is via DVB-T2.
The cost of NRL, AFL and cricket broadcast deals are likely to rise.
It was recently reported that 11% of Australians admitted to eating food out of a bin and consuming no more than one meal a day.
Where are people going to get the money to fund a high speed internet plan and Kayo when they cannot afford to eat three meals a day?
A terrestrial subscription service for Kayo over DVB-T2 is the most efficient and cost effective way of servicing the entire country.
2 Likes
A Reformâs Required
You want people to pay for something they already get now for free?