Bellmullet community TV

Mayo Exile

Antenna wrote: »

C4 should have teletext (it has a 'VBI' teletext service on satellite, though just seems to be horseracing etc) , whilst the other 3 should have P888 subtitles? do they?

Cant be sure, I'll have to check when i go home again at xmas, but to the best of my knowledge, no. All you get I think is a blank page with "p.100" in the top left corner.

Sponge Bob

Well Both Dooncarton and Achill will get DTT in 2011, no idea when though. Castlebar already has it.

UTV BBC1 BBC2 Channel4 Itv London , More4 Film4 E4 ITV2 and the old persons favourite, ITV3,BBC News Sky news etc etc are all free on satellite and the country is rotten with second hand sky boxes like this one generally around €50 with remote and NO CARD REQUIRED not like a few years back.

I fail to see why anyone bothers with a deflector any more, honest.

Mike 1972

Sponge Bob wrote: »

the old persons favourite, ITV3.

Im not THAT old :mad:

watty wrote: »

Elderly and poor people can manage DTT/Satellite fine. I know plenty people in 80s with Freesat or Sky.

But many elderly/poor people have already invested in the necessary aerials etc for the deflector service. realistically a Freesat system installation is going into hundreds of euros (and add to remote/box/cable clutter) for what many people content with the current range of channels on offer represents no real addition.

For new setups freesat obviously makes far more sense than deflector but there are tens (possibly hundreds) of thousands of "legacy" installations out there. Eventually these setups will have to be replaced but there is no immediate reason for doing so

Incidently it would be nice to have the odd thread where someone can raise issues with their reception of a particular deflector system on the terrestrial board without it degenerating into an off topic and done to death bunfight vigorous debate about the merits or otherwise of the continued operation of deflectors. I mean if someone were to make a query about their TG4 reception only to be met with a trolling match regarding the merits or otherwise of the existance of the channel in question and the manner in which it is funded there would (quite rightly) be warnings/infractions being dished out to the offending parties or at the very least theyd be told to take their off topic rants to the "Broadcasting" subforum.

watty

Eventually = about 18 months, realistically.

There ought to be grants and subsidies. The driving factor I beleive is deadline to auction off TV spectrum in mid 2012. Not really Digital TV. DTT is only a means to an end for the Government to get some money.

The people buying spectrum will want assurances that there will be no Squatters on it in Jan 2013.


SCTV was one of the biggest and is more or less gone. Really the writing has been on the wall since 2001 (1st DTT attempt) and when the 2006 .. 2008 so called trial happened and finally C4 and Five joined BBC & ITV FTA on satellite that was the final wake up call.

The only sensible expenditure of money is NOT €70 p.a. propping up a deflector but a community whip around (and Government subsidies) to get poorer people Saorvision and Freesat.

People then get ALL the channels of the Deflector plus more, in better quality and reliablity, so while you somewhat of a point, the analogy is flawed. It's a once off cost for all the existing plus more, better instead of ongoing cost for inferior service.

Mike 1972

watty wrote: »

Eventually = about 18 months, realistically.

Which makes the whole debate about the rights and wrongs of deflectors pretty moot at this stage although I stongly suspect the bunfight will be continue regardless and will still be taking place 18 months years from now........

icdg

Western People wrote:

Meanwhile, a spokesperson for Mayo Community Television Ltd has told this newspaper that many householders have wrong information and are choosing not to sign up with the company this year.

“The directors of Mayo Community Television Ltd are committed to providing this service, which has been available in the West for over 30 years, provided the public continued to support the service,” said the spokesperson.

“The annual contribution for the service of €75 will not be increased and will continue to be collected retrospectively. The collection for the year 2009 is now underway and it is important that people maintain their support, if the service is to continue. There is no truth in the suggestion that the company is finished,” he stressed.

The spokesperson pointed out that no provision is being made for retransmission of the British television channels by Saorview. “Therefore, people who wish to receive the British channels must continue with the service provided by the company or pay the much greater cost of the satellite or pay-per-view digital services.”

Looks like we are perhaps seeing the start of the campaign by the deflectors to have their temporary licences, who were supposed to end with the start of DTT, extended further (and perhaps become permanent). With the lack of UK channels on Saorview they now have a case to make for this and with the political climate at the present it may be that they will be able to make it.

When the deflectors were temporarily authorised, it was understood that DTT would make them obsolete. Now it looks like that will certainly not be the case and asking people in this climate to pay €200 or more to have Freesat installed is not going to go down well in areas of the country where they have popular support.

And make no mistake, these are the same people who
- Had no conimption about disobeying the law in the past, and had local support in the flagrant breaches of the Wireless Telegraphy Acts.
- Managed to get a TD elected in Donegal on the sole issue of support for their cause. I imagine there is no other place in the world where an MP has been elected solely on the basis of citizens apparently god-given right to receive another country's television for free.

The government (and Comreg) may have to make the choice of either extending the licences, terminating them and looking a blind eye to the situation (essentially the "nod and a wink" basis deflectors operated on before 1997) or going down the "right" direction of terminating the licences and enforcing the termination (by sending the heavies, and if necessary, the Guards, to physically confiscat equipment), which may polticially go down like a lead baloon.

watty

Of course they are obsolete. They have been obsolete for years with FTA satellite.

No government will tolerate them now with the carrot of selling off TV spectrum. It would be cheaper for the Government to "buy off" any opposition with some dish install subsidies.

This time will be different to before. Originally there was no alternative nor desire to sell of spectrum. The deflectors are doomed.

Sam Russell

watty wrote: »

Of course they are obsolete. They have been obsolete for years with FTA satellite.

No government will tolerate them now with the carrot of selling off TV spectrum. It would be cheaper for the Government to "buy off" any opposition with some dish install subsidies.

This time will be different to before. Originally there was no alternative nor desire to sell of spectrum. The deflectors are doomed.

If there is an election in the next month or so and a government is returned with a very large majority, as seems likely, then they will be in office for many years, and will be able to take the hard decisions and ignore the people of four channel land. It is obvious that Freesat is a better solution than deflectors, and that measage will spread. By the time the future election comes up, the whole issue will be as important as MMDS, or phone masts.

We as a nation have a lot more important things to occupy our pathetic politicians than deflectors. Our politicians may be corrupt enough to think differently but we shall see.

watty

MMDS doomed too. That spectrum is LTE in Europe. Comreg are itching to auction it for LTE.

They won't let UPC have paired spectrum for Broadband with it, to ensure that UPC loses interest in it.

Sam Russell

My mention of MMDS was the historical controversy when it was the solution to all deflector systems with Princess Holdings leading the charge (pardon the pun) against the 'illegal' deflectors.

Very poor marketing on their part and high reliance on the courts led to MMDS not being the answer. Freesat is Free (except for the kit).

Mike 1972

icdg wrote: »

And make no mistake, these are the same people who
- Had no conimption about disobeying the law in the past.

You want some oats for that high horse ?

icdg wrote: »

- Managed to get a TD elected in Donegal on the sole issue of support for their cause..

What a terrible concept democracy is :rolleyes:

icdg wrote: »

I imagine there is no other place in the world where an MP has been elected solely on the basis of citizens apparently god-given right to receive another country's television for free..

Maybe not single issue candidates but there were certainely campaigns backed by fringe and or regional parties in places like South Tyrol (mainly ethnic German enclave in Italy) Closer to home theres that "deflector" on top of Divis Mountain carrying a channel from the Republic of Ireland !

watty

<pedant>
Black Mountain, not Divis
It got licence BEFORE transmitting, not retrospectively.
</pedant>

Mike 1972

watty wrote: »

<pedant>Black Mountain, not Divis</pedant>

[citation needed]

watty wrote: »

<It got licence BEFORE transmitting, not retrospectively.</pedant>

relevence ?

icdg

Mike 1972 wrote: »

You want some oats for that high horse ?

Obeying the law isn't an option, its a duty of every citizen. Personally I'd love to see the broadcasting industry deregulated as far as possible. And via satellite and or closed systems like cable/MMDS/IPTV you should be able to broadcast what you want (subject to the usual boundaries), as long as you can get a provider to carry you.

But we're not talking about these systems. We're talking about the national airwaves. That's a finite resource. If we just said that regulation was abolished, and anyone could broadcast anything terrestrially on any frequency they liked, then we'd have people fighting over frequencies, interference to stations, etc. The Government are entitled to regulate a finite resource. These people not only chose to ignore the law of the land, they also chose to effectively steal content from UK broadcasters by rebroadcasting their signals without premission. Both of these situations remained the case until Comreg, and not of its own volition, stepped in to regulate the situation.

Sam Russell

icdg wrote: »

Obeying the law isn't an option, its a duty of every citizen. Personally I'd love to see the broadcasting industry deregulated as far as possible. And via satellite and or closed systems like cable/MMDS/IPTV you should be able to broadcast what you want (subject to the usual boundaries), as long as you can get a provider to carry you.

But we're not talking about these systems. We're talking about the national airwaves. That's a finite resource. If we just said that regulation was abolished, and anyone could broadcast anything terrestrially on any frequency they liked, then we'd have people fighting over frequencies, interference to stations, etc. The Government are entitled to regulate a finite resource. These people not only chose to ignore the law of the land, they also chose to effectively steal content from UK broadcasters by rebroadcasting their signals without premission. Both of these situations remained the case until Comreg, and not of its own volition, stepped in to regulate the situation.

If I remember correctly, we are back in the days of Ray Burke. MMDS was devised as the method to bring UK TV to two channel land (as it was then) and licences were handed out to various companies, including Princess Holdings, which was associated with Dr. Tony O'Reilly. It chose to put high prices on the service and to confront the 'deflectors' with the full rigors of the law, including the Gardai. The result was high prices for MMDS and single issue TDs. In the end, the deflectors continued in some places and MMDS got a few clients.

Whether the deflectors stole content, or just extended overspill, could be argued. Many deflectors were self-help groups and not commercial operators. The fact that MMDS was marketed in such a heavy handed way with high prices and gardai support has meant that they never took off the way they could have.

MMDS is now run by NTL with a shrinking user base, and deflectors have tempoary licences. Who won?

icdg

Sam Russell wrote: »

MMDS is now run by NTL with a shrinking user base, and deflectors have tempoary licences. Who won?

British Sky Broadcasting, of course.

watty

For a while very true, Sky was in the lead.

Well, UPC and Sky were about neck & neck last year. UPC gaining Sky customers now since launch of HD & PVR. Because UPC has one ingredient Sky can't get in Ireland.
15Mbps, 30Mbps and soon 120Mbps Broadband. VOD coming too.

But UPC are limited to Urban/Suburban with this. So we are seeing Sky wiping out MMDS and UPC doing better in the Cities.

But both are at near saturation. So overall Pay TV numbers can only go down as I explained before as they are artificially high.

Mike 1972

icdg wrote: »

Obeying the law isn't an option, its a duty of every citizen. .

In general yes (although show me someone who reckons they never break the law and Ill show you a self deluded hypocrite) however there are circumstances when precisely the opposite is the case.

icdg wrote: »

But we're not talking about these systems. We're talking about the national airwaves. That's a finite resource. If we just said that regulation was abolished, and anyone could broadcast anything terrestrially on any frequency they liked, then we'd have people fighting over frequencies, interference to stations, etc.

For years this was trotted out as a reason why deflectors (and non-RTE broadcast radio/TV) couldnt be allowed. It was also claimed there were "no frequencies available" (at a time when the UHF band was devoid of signals across more than half of the country) This was exposed as pure nonsense when in the late 1990's the Doc/ODTR (now comreg) were suddenly able to "find" plenty of frequencies to accomodate the newly licenced deflectors (funnily enough mostly the same frequencies which said deflectors had been using for years).

Meanwhile it was the carefuly regulated system of internationally coordinated frequency planning which gave us Mount Leinster and Presley broadcasting DTT on the same frequency !!!

watty

A stunning example of International Co-operation.

Sponge Bob

An Irish solution to an Irish problem Watty They are entirely surplus to requirement when DTT rolls out in Belmullet in 2011 though ...and presumably in West Donegal around that time when Arranmore and Fanad are done

Mike 1972

Sponge Bob wrote: »

They are entirely surplus to requirement when DTT rolls out

Surely it is Freesat rather than Saorview which is more likely to make deflectors entirely surplus to requirement

Sponge Bob

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Surely it is Freesat rather than Saorview which is more likely to make deflectors entirely surplus to requirement

You forget that the deflectors are used to broadcast TV3 too. Freesat has long made them surplus to their original requirement....but not "entirely"

Mike 1972

Sponge Bob wrote: »

You forget that the deflectors are used to broadcast TV3 too. Freesat has long made them surplus to their original requirement....but not "entirely"

Some would say that TV3 is surplus to requirements as well but fair point otherwise

Antenna

Sam Russell wrote: »

If there is an election in the next month or so and a government is returned with a very large majority, as seems likely, then they will be in office for many years, and will be able to take the hard decisions and ignore the people of four channel land

Sam Russell wrote: »

We as a nation have a lot more important things to occupy our pathetic politicians than deflectors. Our politicians may be corrupt enough to think differently but we shall see.

The FG leader's own consituency is an area which has had strong support for deflectors. His consituency colleague, Michael Ring, in the past was very vocal in support of deflectors and said he himself helped with the setting up of the (then) illegal deflectors. http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/1998/06/03/00027.asp#N220

Whilst nowadays, support for the deflectors would come mainly from elderly people in their areas, politicians are nevertheless not going to ignore the 'grey vote'.

watty wrote: »

.

No government will tolerate them now with the carrot of selling off TV spectrum. It would be cheaper for the Government to "buy off" any opposition with some dish install subsidies.

This time will be different to before. Originally there was no alternative nor desire to sell of spectrum. The deflectors are doomed.

Some (not all ) deflector transmissions are in the upper UHF spectrum (Ch61 and above) that is planned to be sold off (in 2015?)
However there are major transmitters for TV3 and TG4 in the same area of spectrum (such as Maghera and Clermont Carn for both TV3 and TG4, Kippure (TV3) Truskmore (TG4) - these cover far greater chunks of the country than deflectors and no absolute date has been announced for those TV3/Tg4 analogue transmitters to close yet.