I am sick of not getting WLUK in hd on cable. Do you think
if we started contacting WLUK's local advertiser's, we could
make a difference in this at all? Why would an electronics
store want to advertise on a channel that does not support
customers that spend lots of money?
To comment on this story, please log in. If you don't have an account, sign up for one. It's free!
|
teenbean2: digitaldean - I just hooked my outdoor antenna to the existing cable junction box that is mounted outside the box. I unscrewed the Time Warner Cable and hooked my cable to the cable wire going into...
|
||
|
Keith: It looks good to me. Obviously a great improvement over what it was. I like the colors, the bug on the right with the simple temp and time, the panning out, and the text scroll at the bottom....
|
||
|
TvBoy: Damn,
For as long as it took to get that thing launched, I was pretty disappointed. Not that impressive. Better than the last set, but not worth the price paid.
|
 teenbean2 Appleton
|
zchaoli8 hij329
|
 annie r Reno
|
markse7 Weyauwega WI
|
|
digitaldean Kimberly, WI
|
MRB10 MaumelleAR
|
|
gregrv neenah
|
TvBoy Appleton
|
|
Megamedia Green Bay
|
DrBear Green Bay
|
Fox Cities TV is an independent blog and member-driven community based in Green Bay, Wisconsin and serves the Northeast Wisconsin area, including Green Bay, Appleton, and Oshkosh. TV lovers can come here to learn about what's happening in local (and national) television, interact with other TV viewers and express their opinions.
Perhaps ALL local stations
Perhaps ALL local stations should take WLUK's stand on the issue. Why should the local stations be forced to provide a signal for FREE to a reseller such as cable and dish companies, which then SELL you the signal?
Would you give your product or service away for free to someone who would then sell it for a profit?
My cable bill went up nearly 50% last year. I dropped the cable and kept my cable internet. The cable company match AT&T at $15/ month for internet service and so my monthly bill dropped $130/ month when I dropped cable. For $130/ month, we watched NO MORE than 10 "cable" channels.
I put an antenna in my attic and get all of the locals for free. This includes WLUK HD.
I miss ESPN, Discovery, TLC and National Geographic. I do not miss the 24 hour "News" channels that are getting more and more like the Jerry Springer Show every day. I do not miss the shopping, religious, sci fi, or women's channels.
Until cable and dish companies offer "a la carte" channel selections, I will not re-subscribe.
By the way, OTA Fox 11 is stunning! Fox Sports broadcasting is simply incredible! Get an antenna.
Bill
Bill you don't seem to
Bill you don't seem to understand, anyone 60 miles or more from the transmiting antenna of channel 11 dtv is not likely to be able to pick up the signal with an antenna. Yet those of us in that situation are still considered part of the Green Bay market. I have a 35 foot tower, an excellent antenna with siganl amplifier, and a rotor and can only receive channel 11 dtv in perfect atmospheric conditions such as a temperature inversion that causes a tunnel effect for uhf signals. There are thousands of others in my situation. For us it isn't a simple matter of "getting an antenna". Now for your silly agument. When cable first came into being local broadcast stations pressured congress for legislation requiring cable to carry their local stations out of fear of losing local market share. They weren't concerned that the money they invested in their transmitters should be paid for by the cable companies, they just wanted to be sure they didn't lose market share. That is why every other broadcast station in the Green Bay market gives their siganl to the cable and satellite companies. Next year federal regulations require all broadcast stations to shut down their analog broadcasts. At that point the only way any of them will be able to reach cable/satellite viewers will be to provide their signal free of charge for rebroadcast. That is why the other stations are not trying to strong arm the cable/satellite industry. Next year at this time Channel 11 will either have to give their dtv over for rebroadcast or face the prospect of being the only Green Bay broadcaster not available to the thousands of us living in the fringe area of the Green Bay Market. Obviously they will be losing market share and thus advertising dollars. In light of all this you have to admit Jay Zollar is doing nothing but allianting HDTV owners by depriving us of Packer games in HD while locked in a standoff with cable/satellite services that he cannot win. In other words he is stubborn to the point of imbicillity
Bill, where did you say your
Bill, where did you say your cave was located? First off, just to fill you in about a little that I am sure you already knew, but anyway, I asked the same question to my local cable provider, and if you think that the cable companies are getting these HD feeds for free, guess again! The cable company I spoke to has I would say less that 10,000 customers since it only serves a very small area, but did you know that these cable companies are paying a hefty price to rebroadcast those local channels in HD, and I am not talking hundreds of dollars per month, it is in the thousands of dollars that your local cable company pays in fees to local off air channels in this area. I have also heard that they could get this channel in HD if they were willing to fork out around $10,000 a month. Gee, lets see, 10,000 customers at $10,000! Now does that help explain why your cable bill is going up in price? Also may I note that as of a few months ago, there has been NO cable company or dish company in this area that has reached an agreement with Fox 11, which I am sure still holds true today. So if this deal should ever go through, not just cable but also dish customers will be feeling the price increase. It may be true that with dish, you may avoid these charges since you will need your own HD antenna to get these channels in HD. Yet if you think cable is expensive, get a dish, buy an antenna, rent a dish box for each TV along with a monthly additional line charge plus all these other charges on top of charges that they come up with, and when all is said and done, you can have your $29 a month dish special and it will only cost you about $72 for those 100 channels, which over half are either PPV channels or informative channels which include the channel that explains how to read and pay your dish bill.
As for the price of High Speed Internet Service through your local cable company, I guess all I can say is you get what you pay for. If you do not like the 6 plus meg that you get with a cable modem at around $45 a month, then feel free to pay the going rate of $21 for some good old fashion dial up service. But just remember as you are going out into the kitchen to make that sandwich as long as you are waiting for that next page to open on your Internet, since you are flying at a whole 28k, that the bottom line is YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR! So if High Speed Internet is not something that you can afford, please live within your means and call your local dial up provider today. Which I guess is one advantage to dial up, at least you will be obligated to keep that dinosaur they call a house phone at only a mere $50 a month! So this is one thing you may want to consider, since more than likely you already have a cell phone, why not get rid of that antique house phone and with what you save between your home phone and your dial up bill each month, you will still come out over $20 ahead each month when you enjoy the High Speed Internet that cable has to offer.
I agree, consumers should
I agree, consumers should boycott Fox 11 if they insist on not broadcasting HD on cable. Advertisers BEWARE, many fewer viewers watch Fox 11 than any of the other channels because they're not on cable. Your advertising dollars are best spent elsewhere!
Unfortunately, I hate to say
Unfortunately, I hate to say it but I think advertiser boycott really won't do much of anything. If you think of the promos they're doing with Suess, Suess is getting just as much out of it as WLUK is, because they're going to be selling antennas, ATSC boxes, etc. A Van Vreede's probably buys across many stations and media so I'm sure they could care less that WLUK is denying them a niche audience. National buys like Best Buy or Circuit City probably care more that they're carrying NFL football and American Idol than they do real numbers compared to other stations.
We're still the whiny minority in their eyes, and if they aren't going out of their way to accommodate us now, I doubt they'll start soon.
(And by the way, I don't actively boycott advertisers on WLUK. I do, however, actively seek out those who advertise on stations that care.)
I think you are right, an
I think you are right, an advertising boycott is almost impossible to organize. since I can't receive channel 11 in HD I make my owm statement by never watching them on cable. We receive Milwaukee's Fox channel via cable and I watch them whenever I want to watch Fox programming. I encourage everyone else to do the same. I am watching with interest to see what Mr. Zollar plans to do next year when federal regulations require him to shut down the analog broadcast signals. If he still refuses to provide his dtv signal to cable/satellite providers he will be the only Green Bay broadcast station not on cable/satellite. That's a huge loss in market share likely to be significant enough to cost him his job (as it should).
These points are NOT true.
These points are NOT true. WLUK IS on all the local cable lineups and on the dish lineups if you get locals. It is just not in HD. The advertizers are still being seen. Packer fans with cable or Dish subscriptions still watch the games on FOX, just not in HD. The advertizers are still getting their ads out.
Fans don't stop watching House just because their supplier doesn't do HD. They still watch.
When I had cable I felt the same way. I was unhappy with Jay Zollar and the whole argument. Then rationalization set in. I realized that I would not GIVE a product that I had produced to someone for free so they could sell it to someone else. I also know that I would not provide a constant service (work) for free so someone else could profit from it.
THIS is what the cable and dish companies want. They pay Disney BILLIONS for a chance to air ESPN, Disney and ABC. By the way, Lifetime, A&E, E!, and all the subchannels such as Toon Disney, ESPN 2, etc. are also included in Disney's broadcasting fold. You pay a large amount of money to the cable or dish companies so they can pay Disney what they ask for their signal. When the NFL Network and Big Ten Network ask for the same type of payments for their signals, sports fans say "YES! make everyone pay 15 cents per month for it so I can watch!" Meanwhile, non-sports viewers say "No! don't raise my rates for something I don't want!" (by the way...I am a huge sports fan and graduated from the UW. I am also a Packer season ticket holder) If these channels were "a la carte", you would not pay 15 cents a month, you would pay several dollars a month, and those who did not want the service would pay nothing. Of course, then you could opt out of paying for the shopping channels and other crap channels you never watch.
If you truly want cable or dish networks to provide the locals in HD, you should tell your provider that you would be happy to pay more for your service and they can pass it along.
Cable rate hikes are incredible. Why put up with it. I dare you to get an antenna and try OTA TV. You may be able to live without 250 channels. If not, ask for another price increase so you can have the locals in HD.
I'm not against you guys, I'm just upset with your suppliers. These companies claim huge losses, force huge rate increases, and yet, they somehow not only survive, but get bigger and bigger. If it continues, perhaps the little local affiliates will dissapear in favor of a national feed. That would really hurt us. Local broadcasting is NEEDED. Without it, the local economy would falter. Local news would not be as efficient. Local programming would be non-existant.
I'm actually using Hulu.com
I'm actually using Hulu.com to watch most of my FOX programming these days. It's not true HD, but it's better quality than analog, plus it's free and has less obtrusive advertising (typically one 15-second spot in a commercial break instead of many) plus no annoying FOX "coming up next" on-screen overlays. If a program is in HD (or Fox Widescreen), it comes in its widescreen format and looks pretty damn good actually. I have a Windows Media Center as my OTA/Cable DVR. While it's not totally convenient switching from WMC to IE to pull up Hulu, I like it. Plus they have NBC, some feature length movies and some cable network stuff too.
I hope more cable networks put stuff on Hulu (or other services like it) soon. I think that's about as close to "a la carte" programming as we're ever going to see.
Did you forget that when
Did you forget that when cable first began local braodcast stations were happy give their product free of charge to cable in order to reach thousands of households who were unable to receive their broadcasts via their antennas. They went so far as to lobby congress for legislation requiring cable to carry their stations. Nothing has changed in that regard other than the fact that cable/satellite is no longer a commodity found only in fringe reception areas where antennas can barely pull in over the air broadcast signals. You seem to forget that there are still thousands of households in that situation. For us cable/satellite is our only means to watch broadcast television without straining to make out a picture through the "snow". Now we enter the era of dtv carrying hd transmissions that travel less distance than the analog signals did. When analog broadcasts end next year we won't even have the luxury of viewing a snowy picture from an antenna as there is simply no picture when the dtv signal strenth is low. The only way broadcast dtv signals will be able to reach us is through rebroadcast by cable/satellite. Thus cable/satellite will be performing a service for local broadcast stations by giving them a means of reaching our households. Just as in the early days of cable, broadcast stations will rely on cable/satellite services to secure the fringe areas of their local advertising markets. And just think, cable/satellite doesn't even charge them for this service thanks to the legislation they pushed through many years ago. With all this in mind you can see why every other braodcast station in the Green Bay market has no problem giving their dtv signal to cable/satellite services. As for the preium stations found on modern cable systems such as Disney, ESPN etc, these are not local over the air broadcast stations with responsiblities to local markets. There is a huge difference both in funding mechanisms as well as mission of these channels.
My comment is this. I look
My comment is this. I look at the little antenna I have at home that I'm using in my bedroom (through the walls mind you and in storms) that are not the least affected by the weather or anything except for what is happening with their merger and I'm talking about XM Satellite Radio. From what I've seen in the almost 2 years I have it Dish Network and Direct TV and all comers should watch out if a little antenna into a little box can receive over 170 genres. It's fascinating. I have not had any problems with my service at all. It's the wave of the future guys. Who wants a stupid old Dish on their house. $12.95 a month is all I pay (well actually I have a receiver in my car as well). Cable is outrageous. AT&T is good. It's like when I talk to my parents and inlaws. They say who is going to be able to afford it. I see Time Warner may be adding 300 jobs. I'm sure with U-Verse coming here in the next few months to half a year that a lot of changes are going to be happening. There has to be competition. Monoplies do no one any good. Oh yeah. I hate to admit it but I'm a former cable employee. Technology in 28 years has advanced from slide boxes from Hamlin in 1981 to today's dishes and satellite radio, Picture Perfect High Definition Televisions. People we can be proud of all we have accomplished but there is so much more to come.
Maybe television isn't the whole scheme. People make what the world is today. Trust me, we can do so much better. I'm proud of the Fox Valley. I'm proud of the traditions we have here. With the exception of seeing Mickey's Walt Disney World during December, there isn't anyplace I would rather live. Technology is awesome if used for the right purposes.
God Bless The Fox Valley.
May it be a Good 2008. GO PACK GO! Psst...We don't need no 100,000 seat stadium. We have one of the best and we didn't even tear it down to renovate it. You probably should by now no what I'm talking about.
I feel that I am being
I feel that I am being forced to Purchase a separate antenae to get one channel in HD. WLUK are throwing a huge fit about cable and satelite using their signal. Most viewers have to be sick about poor picture quality on FOX. Advertizers should realize that a growing number of viewers own HDTV's and are in advertently avoiding the FOX network. I know that I tend to watch channels with the HD logo and avoid those without it.
It is funny that WLUK can think that there channel will compete against the far superior picture quality of the other networks.
I feel that the law should change and a national feed should be aloud if HD is not available in your area.
I agree that WLUK is missing
I agree that WLUK is missing the point here. Yes, right now they are still getting the ad dollars, etc., but they have to look ahead from the business side of things. It's fine and dandy to stand up to the cable company for what you believe is right, but in the end your only hurting your end user - the viewer. Every day, many of these viewers are becoming more and more agitated about this whole thing - plus they notice your station is the only local of the big 4 networks not broadcast in HD on cable, dish, etc. By forcing your viewers - your customers - to buy a separate antenna, all your doing is making it inconvenient for them (wait until a couple of weeks from now if the Packers are in the Super Bowl and WLUK isn't HD represented on cable, etc.). You should always do what makes the customer happy, and in this case WLUK is making more of their customers angry and upset with the whole thing than happy. They need to think ahead, and understand what this could mean for them in the long run when HD is used by the majority of the population.
I understand that Fox is
I understand that Fox is available in other markets. WFXS (in the Wausau market) is not yet transmitting OTA in HD, yet they send their HD signal through a fiberoptic cable to Charter Cable.
My question remains...Hawkeye, will you work for free to provide a service, free of charge, to someone who will resell it?
Local broadcasters begged for federal legislation forcing cable companies to carry their signals some three decades ago. The reason was not that they would lose market share to the cable channels, but that the national networks would see cable as a way of eliminating local affiliates. If cable companies would have been able to provide the national network feeds instead of the local feeds, the locals would have been destroyed. The national neworks would have had full say in all programming and advertizing 24/7...a very sweet prospect! At the same time, local programming would have been severely curtailed and local advertizing would have skyrocketed in price as local businesses would have had to compete with national ad campaigns and thier associated advertizing budgets.
I can't help where people live, what hill they built their house behind, their landlords rules, etc. The fact is, you PAY for cable. You pay for other channels. Fox 11 wants a piece of the payout. I used to be unhappy with Fox 11 (when I payed for cable). Then it clicked. I understand why they want to be paid. They are in demand. Very high demand.
I feel for your situation. Call your cable company. Tell them to pay Fox 11 for the signal. Tell them it should be part of the basic cable package and your rates should not go up. WLUK is not at fault, your cable company is! They pay other broadcasters for their signal, yet they feel they should be allowed to sell a free signal for a profit. Just ask your cable company to provide you with the local channels...all of them...free of charge. See what they tell you!
Bill
I don't know if people saw
I don't know if people saw this from Engadget. Someone posted in comments a recent letter they got from Jay Zollar:
Less than two cents a day? Isn't that 35-60 cents a head per month? I thought their price was more like 20-23 cents last we heard. 60 cents a month is about what NFL Network is trying to get, and I'm sure NFL Network spends a heck of a lot more in operations than WLUK does. After all, that quality play-by-play from football expert Bryant Gumbel doesn't come cheap (tongue firmly planted in cheek).
And by the way... when are they going to understand that you don't need to be charged extra to get HD locals from cable? With a properly equipped QAM-ATSC tuner, you can get it even if you don't have a cable box. I really wish they'd just yank their SD signal off cable and satellite and be done with it. That seems like what they'd really like to do.
The amount seems quite high,
The amount seems quite high, considering they are a local affiliate. I bet if they were offered 20 cents / month they would jump.
The question is, who pays? The cable companies SHOULD provide it free of charge, but they won't. They make you pay 15 cents / month for channels I would NEVER turn on, and I have no choice.
Give us a la carte programming. I will gladly pay $1/ month for each and every channel I want. That is good money! Yet, the cable and dish companies will never do it. Why? Why ruin a good thing and give the customer what they really want?
Just think!
7 locals
2 ESPN
4 Discovery / National Geographic / TLC
2 News
4 independants (TBS etc)
1 FSN North
4 Disney and Nick for the kids
2 Big Ten and NFL
2 History and biography
3 Home improvement / cooking type
8 Starz type channels
$39 / month plus tax
And I use only 39 channels of bandwidth, so I want them in HD for that price.
Others can pick and choose their own list of different channels and services such as PPV.
Lock out all unsubscribed channels at the head and let me tune them with ASTC tuner.
I would buy into this in a heartbeat, and I would be happy to pay a 4% per year increase. They want to have the benefits of monopoly afforded to them as a sort of utility. Let them be regulated and governed as a utility!
Bill
First of all, I really,
First of all, I really, really don't get the "monopoly" stuff. That came up so much with the video competition bill, but from my understanding, cable companies are only monopolies because no other cable companies want to come into a market and split the market at best. I thought that franchises were not exclusive, but perhaps I was misinformed. And let's not forget satellite choices as well. If satellite didn't exist, I could see cable being called a monopoly. Sure, some people (myself included) can't get satellite because of physical obstructions or living in an apartment with no outdoor private space to put a dish, but telco TV is going to bust that problem up pretty soon in our area. OK, November may not be "soon" but you get the idea.
Secondly, I doubt they'd be able to sell you channels at a dollar apiece if they offered a la carte. All those little niche channels that only cost pennies a month, when faced with a giant erosion of subscribers, would likely have to either up their "per household" rate if they could be excluded from carriage or disappear entirely. I agree... I don't watch 75% of the channels I get, but you really think you'll be able to get ESPN for a buck a month? They're charging over 3 per month now. Imagine what they'd charge if you could pick channels wholesale. I think too much scrutiny is focused on tv service companies and not on the content providers. I'm sure NBC Universal or Viacom uses their corporate muscle to force cable companies to carry all their channels by offering reasonable rates when all channels are taken, rather than separately. If I can just take Bravo and not CNBC, ShopNBC, etc... Bravo's price would probably go up, wouldn't you think?
And I don't know if you were aiming at one genre of provider or another, but let's not forget that DirecTV and Dish are both raising rates this year too. Everyone gripes about cable raising prices, like satellite is some sort of magical service that always stays low. They have to pass along the rising cost of program carriage to the consumer just like everyone else.
(Personally, I say WLUK should just pull their SD signal off satellite and cable and pimp antenna reception full-time, but I guess they don't hate cable *that* much.)
Mark, You make good points,
Mark,
You make good points, but...
Yes, ESPN is over $3/ month right now, AND they charge every household. The thing is, I will bet that at least 25% of the subsctibers don't want it. Old ladies, non-sports types. Also, the channels that cause you and I to get the painful look on our faces when we have to flip past them...there are people who want them. My sister, for one, loves the shopping channels and the We channel.
Let the market dictate. There are roughly 100 million cable and satellite customers. Let the customers decide the channels they want and the rates they are willing to pay. Maybe ESPN is worth $4 to the subscribers who want it. Maybe WLUK is only worth 50 cents to its subscribers.
Bill
Will.... I really, really
Will....
I really, really wish ESPN would charge just four bucks a head if a la carte happened. Given the opportunity to set a direct price for its channels to let the customer choose, I'd guess Disney would want to hike the price up to make up for the 25% of subscribers they'd lose (and possibly add a little bit more to their coffers as well).
I wish content companies would start offering their channels/programs direct to consumers over the Internet. It'd be nice to go direct to the content companies and choose just what I want, but then you'd still have to have someone like Time Warner or AT&T selling you access to the Internet to get to that content. And with Time Warner testing out pay-per-byte billing for Internet access, I have a feeling that's not going to be pretty.
I don't think there's any hard/fast solution to this stuff... unfortunately.
I have one comment on the
I have one comment on the whole WLUK issue here. It isn't up to the employees or Jay Zollar at WLUK to get WLUK on Time Warner. It's completely out of their hands. It lies in the hands of LIN-TV. It's up to them to reach the agreements to allow WLUK to be carried on Cable. There are a number of other LIN stations that are in the same position as WLUK. Until LIN corporate reaches an agreement with the cable providers, we're not going to see WLUK on Time Warner. The best Mr. Zollar or anyone else at WLUK can do is to pass the word onto LIN that people want WLUK on cable. The ball is in LIN-TV's and Time Warner's court, WLUK (and all other LIN-TV stations) is just stuck in the middle.
Consider this...what if half
Consider this...what if half of the USA bought an antenna and went back to OTA, dropping pay TV?
WBAY just picked up RTN. Would it be out of the realm of possibility that, in order to keep viewership for its advertisers, Discovery and National Geographic would sell / lease/ give its programming to local OTAs in every market? Perhaps they could cut a deal with PBS. We already see The Weather Channel's biggest competitor (Accuweather) broadcast 24 /7 on DTV 7.2 in Wausau.
I have no answers either. I wish there was a perfect television supplier. I do not, however, fault WLUK (or, as the poster before you stated LIN Broadcasting). They produce the product and they want to be paid for its use by anyone who wishes to resell it.
I just purchased an HD tv
I just purchased an HD tv that has a Qam tuner. I have basic cable hooked up to the t.v. I can get the local HD channels (except FOX!), ABC, CBS, NBC & 2 PBS channels. I can also get MANY digital channels on 500's, 600's & some 700.s I know it's digital because my remote has a signal meter that tells me what the strength is. I have tried the 11-1 for Fox and the 51, neither work. I live close to the Lake, so an antenna wouldn't do me much good. Besides, I can't visualize myself disconnecting my cable and connecting an antenna just because i want to watch FOX?? My reception of FOX is the worst channel I recieve.
I bought a five dollar UHF
I bought a five dollar UHF loop antenna. Put it on the back of my flat panel, and you can't even see it. Now I get 13 digital channels and all locals in high defenition, all for free. So why is it again that I should be mad because I can't pay for something that's free?
May I ask where you live and
May I ask where you live and what brand/model antenna you're using?
I've never had nearly as much success getting channels over-the-air as you are, so I'd like to see what you're using. I can normally get just enough signal from WLUK to keep the dropouts limited to about twice per hour, but then I can't get WACY or WIWB at all, and WPNE is marginal (the former I don't watch, the latter I have a cable DVR to record). The tuners I selected for my Windows Media Center are just about as forgiving as you can get for marginal signals, but it's still not perfect.
(By the way, I've never pined for the good, reliable 'ol analog signal as much as I have since digital came along. Marginal signals on analog are at least watchable. Digital skips, freezes and sputters. I think when the switch happens, people are going to be pissed when they see this happen to them and they're not used to it.)
(By the way, I've never
(By the way, I've never pined for the good, reliable 'ol analog signal as much as I have since digital came along. Marginal signals on analog are at least watchable. Digital skips, freezes and sputters. I think when the switch happens, people are going to be pissed when they see this happen to them and they're not used to it.)
I agree.
More troubling is that when WLUK changes from UHF channel 51 to VHF channel 11 next year, you will need a VHF antenna. Even then, it's signal will be about 10 DBm less than it is right now at my house!
Bill
I live in De Pere, about 4
I live in De Pere, about 4 to 9 miles from the towers (depending which of the 3) I believe multipath has alot to do with the signal drifting in and out. It seemed the better the antenna (amplifed, outdoor, etc.) the worse it got! I found an old omnidirectional UHF ring in the junk drawer, and bang, it works perfect. I now have my computer and 3 TV's on small unamplified indoor antennas and they all work perfect.
I've tried just about every
I've tried just about every type of antenna I could find at most consumer electronics stores. The cheap-o's... the elaborates... The Philips Silver Sensor is the only one I've had even marginal success with.
I'm on the north edge of Appleton by the way.
Wow, on the North edge of
Wow, on the North edge of Appleton I would have thought would be no problem. Did you line the antenna up with the direction from antennaweb.org? Do you have aluminum siding or anything like that? Try pointing out a window, or moving to a different room? I'm sure you tried all this but it's just so weird that were not that far from each other yet results are so different.
Where I am now... I'm on the
Where I am now... I'm on the top floor of a 3-story apartment complex (4 units to a floor) and I'm on the southwest corner of the building. I have no windows looking in the direction of the towers, and I'm shooting through a couple walls in my apartment, then through the next unit to my east.
Even when I was living in a ranch house a few blocks north of here, I would get pretty much the exact same results.
I have a $40 Antennacraft
I have a $40 Antennacraft MXU-59 hanging in my attic. I live southwest of New London, behind a large hill. I have dropouts at dusk once in a while with all channels. I am sure that an outdoor tower will give me perfect reception at all times.
My distance is about 38 miles from the towers.
Bill
WOW Jerry! I was a top tier
WOW Jerry!
I was a top tier cable subscriber with internet for 22 years. When my bill was raised from $100/ month to $145/ month instantly, I instantly dropped cable and put up an antenna. I renegotiated my internet service and the cable company now gives my 5 meg service for $14.95/ month.
My cave is outside of New London. As long as cable and dish rates stay where they are, I will stay with OTA as my source. As much as I like ESPN, Discovery, Nat. Geo., TLC, History, etc...It is not worth paying $120/ month for 10-12 enjoyable channels. I can get just as much out of the 5 PBS channels plus the local major networks.
You are correct. I get what I pay for. Local phone service through ATT for $17.95/ mo. High speed 5 meg internet through Charter for $14.95/ mo. Unlimited nationwide long distance on two cell phones (family plan) through Alltel for $39/ mo, and crystal clear digital and HD local television through an attic mounted antenna feeding 3 televisions. That is $72 /month for TV, high speed internet, land line phone and two unlimited cell phones.
Bill