PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Thanks for that the info but the CEA could care less about Americans on low
or fixed incomes. I agree that the time frame maybe too quick but what they
should have addressed is the labeling of televisions currently being sold.
That should go into effect immediately.

Hugh




----- Original Message -----
From: "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
To: "HDTV Magazine" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:39 PM
Subject: FW: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES
AND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC


> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>
>
> I missed all the tips messages of the last couple of days, lets see if
> this one goes thru.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Consumer Electronic Association
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:01 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES
> AND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
>
>
> FOR RELEASE
> Contact: Jeff Joseph or Megan Pollock
> tel: (703) 907-7664 tel: (703) 907-7668
> e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected]
> http://www.CE.org
>
> PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES AND DISRUPT
> MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
>
> New Burdens on Smaller Sets Would Penalize Lower Income Consumers
>
> Arlington, Va., July 27, 2005 - Accelerating and expanding the
> Federal Communications
> Commission's (FCC) digital television tuner requirements will sharply
> raise prices on smaller sized
> television sets causing disruption in the marketplace and harming
> low-income consumers, said the
> Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) and the Consumer Electronics
> Retailers Coalition (CERC)
> today. The organizations expressed their concerns in comments filed today
> with the FCC in response
> to the Commission's Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) on
> digital television (DTV)
> receiving capability.
>
> In the FNPRM issued on June 9, 2005, the Commission proposes to
> accelerate the current
> mandated timetable for the inclusion of a DTV tuner in television sets of
> all sizes from July 1,
> 2007 to a completion date of no later than December 31, 2006. It further
> proposes to extend the
> digital tuner requirements to receivers with screen sizes of less than
> 13-inches.
>
> In their filing, CEA and CERC cautioned that the accelerated date
> would be extremely difficult
> for manufacturers to meet. They added that if implemented, such a
> requirement likely would cause a
> sudden jump in prices, thereby putting smaller sets out of reach of
> Americans with low or fixed
> incomes.
>
> "Accelerating the tuner mandate deadlines for all sets would have the
> unfortunate result of
> decreasing the number of DTV tuners in the marketplace, which clearly does
> not further the goals of
> the Commission nor the goals of the DTV transition as a whole," said CEA
> President and CEO Gary
> Shapiro. "By contrast, the current and anticipated July 2007 date allows
> time for economies of
> scale to develop fully. This will lessen the sticker shock for consumers,
> allowing these products a
> chance to compete against less expensive, tuner-less alternatives."
>
> In their comments, CEA and CERC explained that there is insufficient
> basis for the Commission
> to depart from the existing July 1, 2007 date pertaining to TV receivers
> with screen sizes of 13 to
> 24-inches. This date has been relied upon in the product and resource
> planning of manufacturers and
> in the merchandising and marketing plans of retailers. Moreover, a change
> in this date to a date
> any earlier than March 1, 2007, would be not only unwarranted; it would be
> infeasible for the
> general population of TV receiver manufacturers, who require a minimum of
> 18 to 24 months to plan,
> develop and deploy new equipment. Even if manufacturers were able to meet
> a foreshortened
> production schedule, a date any earlier than March 2007 could result in a
> complete inability for
> many manufacturers to produce products in this category, and cost
> increases for those that do become
> available, that the marketplace would be unlikely to sustain.
>
> "This development would defeat the purpose of the tuner mandate
> itself," said Shapiro.
>
> CEA and CERC noted that current market forces and the regulatory
> regime to date have proven
> successful. CEA forecasts that the industry will this year sell 9 million
> DTVs with an integrated
> over-the-air (OTA) digital tuner, 16.7 million in 2006, 27 million in 2007
> and 33 million in 2008.
> By 2009 CEA projects that 97 million DTV tuners will have been sold,
> translating to 86 percent U.S.
> household penetration of OTA tuners.
>
> With respect to new receivers with screen sizes less than 13-inches,
> CEA and CERC explained
> that since the deadline on sets 13- to 25-inches has not taken effect it
> would be difficult to know
> at present, the feasibility and practicality of including DTV tuners in
> TVs under 13-inchs. They
> noted that it currently appears that the cost and development burdens on
> manufacturers, and the
> impact on consumers, would outweigh any possible benefits.
>
> While the FNPRM did not address the issue of product labeling and the
> need for manufactures
> and retailers to clearly label new TV sets to indicate whether they can
> receive over-the-air DTV
> signals or only off-the-air analog signals, CEA and CERC noted that, "TV
> receivers with digital
> tuning capability are, by and large, clearly identified as such in
> advertising and point of display
> materials. The main issue is not if labeling is occurring but whether
> consumers can determine for
> themselves under what circumstances they will need a tuner for digital OTA
> signals."
>
> "CEA will continue to work closely with the FCC as further actions
> are taken to help complete
> the successful transition to DTV," concluded Shapiro.
>
> About CEA:
> The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) is the preeminent trade
> association promoting
> growth in the consumer technology industry through technology policy,
> events, research, promotion
> and the fostering of business and strategic relationships. CEA represents
> more than 2,000 corporate
> members involved in the design, development, manufacturing, distribution
> and integration of audio,
> video, mobile electronics, wireless and landline communications,
> information technology, home
> networking, multimedia and accessory products, as well as related services
> that are sold through
> consumer channels. Combined, CEA's members account for more than $121
> billion in annual sales.
> CEA's resources are available online at www.CE.org, the definitive source
> for information about the
> consumer electronics industry.
> CEA also sponsors and manages the International CES - Defining
> Tomorrow's Technology. All
> profits from CES are reinvested into industry services, including
> technical training and education,
> industry promotion, engineering standards development, market research and
> legislative advocacy.
>
> UPCOMING EVENTS
>
>
> * 2005 CEA Summer Technology and
> Standards Forum
> July 25-29, 2005, Denver, CO
> * CEA Industry Forum
> October 17-19, 2005, Las Vegas, NV
> * EHX Fall 2005
> November 7-11, 2005, Anaheim, CA
> * CES New York Press Preview
> November 15, 2005, New York, NY
> * CES Unveiled: The Official Press Event of CES
> January 3, 2006, Las Vegas, NV
> * 2006 International CES
> January 5-8, 2006, Las Vegas, NV
> * Winter Summit 2006
> March 2-4, 2006, Vail, CO
> * CEA 2006 Winter Technology and
> Standards Forum
> March 6-10, 2006, Clearwater Beach, FL
> * CEA Spring Break
> March 14-17, 2006, Washington, DC
> * 2006 PARA Conference
> May 3-7, 2006, Hilton Head, SC
> * 2006 Consumer Electronics CEO Summit
> June 21-23, 2006, Southampton, Bermuda
> * 2006 SINOCES
> July 7-10, 2006, Qingdao, China
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

O, woe is me! Yeah, sure. Every time the mouth of some organization of
technology, CEA for example, screams about price and how it will hurt
consumers, one of his flock goes and produces a low price item with the
required specs. Look at prices on HD sets now and how much they have fallen
over just the past year, especially table top and RPTV CRT sets.

The market is extremely competitive and manufacturers find a way as they
know profit is in volume.

Let him scream; its just a smokescreen for delaying tactics.

Enough said.




-----Original Message-----
From: Rodolfo La Maestra
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:40 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: FW: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES
AND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----



I missed all the tips messages of the last couple of days, lets see if this
one goes thru.

Best Regards,

Rodolfo La Maestra

-----Original Message-----
From: Consumer Electronic Association
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:01 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES
AND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC


FOR RELEASE
Contact: Jeff Joseph or Megan
Pollock
tel: (703) 907-7664 tel: (703) 907-7668
e-mail: [email protected]
e-mail: [email protected]
http://www.CE.org

PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES AND DISRUPT
MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC

New Burdens on Smaller Sets Would Penalize Lower Income Consumers

Arlington, Va., July 27, 2005 - Accelerating and expanding the Federal
Communications
Commission's (FCC) digital television tuner requirements will sharply raise
prices on smaller sized
television sets causing disruption in the marketplace and harming low-income
consumers, said the
Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) and the Consumer Electronics
Retailers Coalition (CERC)
today. The organizations expressed their concerns in comments filed today
with the FCC in response
to the Commission's Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) on digital
television (DTV)
receiving capability.

In the FNPRM issued on June 9, 2005, the Commission proposes to
accelerate the current
mandated timetable for the inclusion of a DTV tuner in television sets of
all sizes from July 1,
2007 to a completion date of no later than December 31, 2006. It further
proposes to extend the
digital tuner requirements to receivers with screen sizes of less than
13-inches.

In their filing, CEA and CERC cautioned that the accelerated date
would be extremely difficult
for manufacturers to meet. They added that if implemented, such a
requirement likely would cause a
sudden jump in prices, thereby putting smaller sets out of reach of
Americans with low or fixed
incomes.

"Accelerating the tuner mandate deadlines for all sets would have the
unfortunate result of
decreasing the number of DTV tuners in the marketplace, which clearly does
not further the goals of
the Commission nor the goals of the DTV transition as a whole," said CEA
President and CEO Gary
Shapiro. "By contrast, the current and anticipated July 2007 date allows
time for economies of
scale to develop fully. This will lessen the sticker shock for consumers,
allowing these products a
chance to compete against less expensive, tuner-less alternatives."

In their comments, CEA and CERC explained that there is insufficient
basis for the Commission
to depart from the existing July 1, 2007 date pertaining to TV receivers
with screen sizes of 13 to
24-inches. This date has been relied upon in the product and resource
planning of manufacturers and
in the merchandising and marketing plans of retailers. Moreover, a change
in this date to a date
any earlier than March 1, 2007, would be not only unwarranted; it would be
infeasible for the
general population of TV receiver manufacturers, who require a minimum of 18
to 24 months to plan,
develop and deploy new equipment. Even if manufacturers were able to meet a
foreshortened
production schedule, a date any earlier than March 2007 could result in a
complete inability for
many manufacturers to produce products in this category, and cost increases
for those that do become
available, that the marketplace would be unlikely to sustain.

"This development would defeat the purpose of the tuner mandate
itself," said Shapiro.

CEA and CERC noted that current market forces and the regulatory
regime to date have proven
successful. CEA forecasts that the industry will this year sell 9 million
DTVs with an integrated
over-the-air (OTA) digital tuner, 16.7 million in 2006, 27 million in 2007
and 33 million in 2008.
By 2009 CEA projects that 97 million DTV tuners will have been sold,
translating to 86 percent U.S.
household penetration of OTA tuners.

With respect to new receivers with screen sizes less than 13-inches,
CEA and CERC explained
that since the deadline on sets 13- to 25-inches has not taken effect it
would be difficult to know
at present, the feasibility and practicality of including DTV tuners in TVs
under 13-inchs. They
noted that it currently appears that the cost and development burdens on
manufacturers, and the
impact on consumers, would outweigh any possible benefits.

While the FNPRM did not address the issue of product labeling and the
need for manufactures
and retailers to clearly label new TV sets to indicate whether they can
receive over-the-air DTV
signals or only off-the-air analog signals, CEA and CERC noted that, "TV
receivers with digital
tuning capability are, by and large, clearly identified as such in
advertising and point of display
materials. The main issue is not if labeling is occurring but whether
consumers can determine for
themselves under what circumstances they will need a tuner for digital OTA
signals."

"CEA will continue to work closely with the FCC as further actions are
taken to help complete
the successful transition to DTV," concluded Shapiro.

About CEA:
The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) is the preeminent trade
association promoting
growth in the consumer technology industry through technology policy,
events, research, promotion
and the fostering of business and strategic relationships. CEA represents
more than 2,000 corporate
members involved in the design, development, manufacturing, distribution and
integration of audio,
video, mobile electronics, wireless and landline communications, information
technology, home
networking, multimedia and accessory products, as well as related services
that are sold through
consumer channels. Combined, CEA's members account for more than $121
billion in annual sales.
CEA's resources are available online at www.CE.org, the definitive source
for information about the
consumer electronics industry.
CEA also sponsors and manages the International CES - Defining
Tomorrow's Technology. All
profits from CES are reinvested into industry services, including technical
training and education,
industry promotion, engineering standards development, market research and
legislative advocacy.

UPCOMING EVENTS


* 2005 CEA Summer Technology and
Standards Forum
July 25-29, 2005, Denver, CO
* CEA Industry Forum
October 17-19, 2005, Las Vegas, NV
* EHX Fall 2005
November 7-11, 2005, Anaheim, CA
* CES New York Press Preview
November 15, 2005, New York, NY
* CES Unveiled: The Official Press Event of CES
January 3, 2006, Las Vegas, NV
* 2006 International CES
January 5-8, 2006, Las Vegas, NV
* Winter Summit 2006
March 2-4, 2006, Vail, CO
* CEA 2006 Winter Technology and
Standards Forum
March 6-10, 2006, Clearwater Beach, FL
* CEA Spring Break
March 14-17, 2006, Washington, DC
* 2006 PARA Conference
May 3-7, 2006, Hilton Head, SC
* 2006 Consumer Electronics CEO Summit
June 21-23, 2006, Southampton, Bermuda
* 2006 SINOCES
July 7-10, 2006, Qingdao, China


To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]





To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Hi, The CEA has its shorts in a knot, because of a proposed acceleration
of the conversion schedule...a conversion they have known was coming for
for many years. This while continuing to sell products they KNOW WITH
CERTAINTY are obsolete. Continued sale of these products, to an
unsuspecting, ill informed public has amounted to no less than fraud.

Actually, I wonder whom the CEA is fronting for? Manufacturers in China,
Japan, Korea, or Taiwan? As far as I know there are no manufacturers in
the US of any of their products. Why would retailers in the US be
impacted by an accelerated schedule for technical compliance to the well
known standard?

Of course, the CEA says the prices will go up...doesn't that mean that
profits will go up as well? I doubt that they are profit adverse.

Finally, the CEA claims that low-income persons will be adversely
impacted by buying equipment at a higher price than lower priced
obsolete equipment. Doesn't the sale of obsolete equipment impact them
more?

Howard in South Bend, where football practice will start in several
weeks.



On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 20:49 -0400, Hugh Campbell wrote:
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Thanks for that the info but the CEA could care less about Americans on low
> or fixed incomes. I agree that the time frame maybe too quick but what they
> should have addressed is the labeling of televisions currently being sold.
> That should go into effect immediately.
>
> Hugh
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> To: "HDTV Magazine" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:39 PM
> Subject: FW: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES
> AND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
>
>
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> >
> >
> > I missed all the tips messages of the last couple of days, lets see if
> > this one goes thru.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Rodolfo La Maestra
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Consumer Electronic Association
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:01 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES
> > AND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
> >
> >
> > FOR RELEASE
> > Contact: Jeff Joseph or Megan Pollock
> > tel: (703) 907-7664 tel: (703) 907-7668
> > e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected]
> > http://www.CE.org
> >
> > PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES AND DISRUPT
> > MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
> >
> > New Burdens on Smaller Sets Would Penalize Lower Income Consumers
> >
> > Arlington, Va., July 27, 2005 - Accelerating and expanding the
> > Federal Communications
> > Commission's (FCC) digital television tuner requirements will sharply
> > raise prices on smaller sized
> > television sets causing disruption in the marketplace and harming
> > low-income consumers, said the
> > Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) and the Consumer Electronics
> > Retailers Coalition (CERC)
> > today. The organizations expressed their concerns in comments filed today
> > with the FCC in response
> > to the Commission's Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) on
> > digital television (DTV)
> > receiving capability.
> >
> > In the FNPRM issued on June 9, 2005, the Commission proposes to
> > accelerate the current
> > mandated timetable for the inclusion of a DTV tuner in television sets of
> > all sizes from July 1,
> > 2007 to a completion date of no later than December 31, 2006. It further
> > proposes to extend the
> > digital tuner requirements to receivers with screen sizes of less than
> > 13-inches.
> >
> > In their filing, CEA and CERC cautioned that the accelerated date
> > would be extremely difficult
> > for manufacturers to meet. They added that if implemented, such a
> > requirement likely would cause a
> > sudden jump in prices, thereby putting smaller sets out of reach of
> > Americans with low or fixed
> > incomes.
> >
> > "Accelerating the tuner mandate deadlines for all sets would have the
> > unfortunate result of
> > decreasing the number of DTV tuners in the marketplace, which clearly does
> > not further the goals of
> > the Commission nor the goals of the DTV transition as a whole," said CEA
> > President and CEO Gary
> > Shapiro. "By contrast, the current and anticipated July 2007 date allows
> > time for economies of
> > scale to develop fully. This will lessen the sticker shock for consumers,
> > allowing these products a
> > chance to compete against less expensive, tuner-less alternatives."
> >
> > In their comments, CEA and CERC explained that there is insufficient
> > basis for the Commission
> > to depart from the existing July 1, 2007 date pertaining to TV receivers
> > with screen sizes of 13 to
> > 24-inches. This date has been relied upon in the product and resource
> > planning of manufacturers and
> > in the merchandising and marketing plans of retailers. Moreover, a change
> > in this date to a date
> > any earlier than March 1, 2007, would be not only unwarranted; it would be
> > infeasible for the
> > general population of TV receiver manufacturers, who require a minimum of
> > 18 to 24 months to plan,
> > develop and deploy new equipment. Even if manufacturers were able to meet
> > a foreshortened
> > production schedule, a date any earlier than March 2007 could result in a
> > complete inability for
> > many manufacturers to produce products in this category, and cost
> > increases for those that do become
> > available, that the marketplace would be unlikely to sustain.
> >
> > "This development would defeat the purpose of the tuner mandate
> > itself," said Shapiro.
> >
> > CEA and CERC noted that current market forces and the regulatory
> > regime to date have proven
> > successful. CEA forecasts that the industry will this year sell 9 million
> > DTVs with an integrated
> > over-the-air (OTA) digital tuner, 16.7 million in 2006, 27 million in 2007
> > and 33 million in 2008.
> > By 2009 CEA projects that 97 million DTV tuners will have been sold,
> > translating to 86 percent U.S.
> > household penetration of OTA tuners.
> >
> > With respect to new receivers with screen sizes less than 13-inches,
> > CEA and CERC explained
> > that since the deadline on sets 13- to 25-inches has not taken effect it
> > would be difficult to know
> > at present, the feasibility and practicality of including DTV tuners in
> > TVs under 13-inchs. They
> > noted that it currently appears that the cost and development burdens on
> > manufacturers, and the
> > impact on consumers, would outweigh any possible benefits.
> >
> > While the FNPRM did not address the issue of product labeling and the
> > need for manufactures
> > and retailers to clearly label new TV sets to indicate whether they can
> > receive over-the-air DTV
> > signals or only off-the-air analog signals, CEA and CERC noted that, "TV
> > receivers with digital
> > tuning capability are, by and large, clearly identified as such in
> > advertising and point of display
> > materials. The main issue is not if labeling is occurring but whether
> > consumers can determine for
> > themselves under what circumstances they will need a tuner for digital OTA
> > signals."
> >
> > "CEA will continue to work closely with the FCC as further actions
> > are taken to help complete
> > the successful transition to DTV," concluded Shapiro.
> >
> > About CEA:
> > The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) is the preeminent trade
> > association promoting
> > growth in the consumer technology industry through technology policy,
> > events, research, promotion
> > and the fostering of business and strategic relationships. CEA represents
> > more than 2,000 corporate
> > members involved in the design, development, manufacturing, distribution
> > and integration of audio,
> > video, mobile electronics, wireless and landline communications,
> > information technology, home
> > networking, multimedia and accessory products, as well as related services
> > that are sold through
> > consumer channels. Combined, CEA's members account for more than $121
> > billion in annual sales.
> > CEA's resources are available online at www.CE.org, the definitive source
> > for information about the
> > consumer electronics industry.
> > CEA also sponsors and manages the International CES - Defining
> > Tomorrow's Technology. All
> > profits from CES are reinvested into industry services, including
> > technical training and education,
> > industry promotion, engineering standards development, market research and
> > legislative advocacy.
> >
> > UPCOMING EVENTS
> >
> >
> > * 2005 CEA Summer Technology and
> > Standards Forum
> > July 25-29, 2005, Denver, CO
> > * CEA Industry Forum
> > October 17-19, 2005, Las Vegas, NV
> > * EHX Fall 2005
> > November 7-11, 2005, Anaheim, CA
> > * CES New York Press Preview
> > November 15, 2005, New York, NY
> > * CES Unveiled: The Official Press Event of CES
> > January 3, 2006, Las Vegas, NV
> > * 2006 International CES
> > January 5-8, 2006, Las Vegas, NV
> > * Winter Summit 2006
> > March 2-4, 2006, Vail, CO
> > * CEA 2006 Winter Technology and
> > Standards Forum
> > March 6-10, 2006, Clearwater Beach, FL
> > * CEA Spring Break
> > March 14-17, 2006, Washington, DC
> > * 2006 PARA Conference
> > May 3-7, 2006, Hilton Head, SC
> > * 2006 Consumer Electronics CEO Summit
> > June 21-23, 2006, Southampton, Bermuda
> > * 2006 SINOCES
> > July 7-10, 2006, Qingdao, China
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
> >
> > To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> > day) send an email to:
> > [email protected]
> >
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
> [email protected]


To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Howard,

Good points.

Allow me to give some perspective.

A 13" set that will double up its price due to the integration of an ATSC tuner would increase
abnormally the sale price of an otherwise low cost product (a product that low income people could
not afford anymore).

That will force a manufacturer to stop producing such product because it would not sell, otherwise,
if ignoring the mandate, they would be in a non-compliant position excluding the tuner to sell at a
marketable price. This applies to a $20 VHS VCR that would have to incorporate such tuner as well
(because it has an NTSC tuner on it).

By maintaining the original schedule the CEA is showing an image that tuner prices will come down
significantly within the deadline due to economies of scale, and I comment: a situation not seen
since 1998; if in 7 years it did not happen it is obvious they were controlling the prices up until
even today, look at the 50" plasma Elite monitor vs. integrated TV, $1000 difference MSRP, quite a
tuner one might say, reason by which all monitors in BO are sold out and the integrated plasmas have
a $500 rebate to entice uninformed people.

In other words, high selling prices of STBs and integrated tuners was a good business proposition,
and much better when mandated by the FCC. We experienced a similar scenario when simple DVD
players were selling for over $500, now dumped to $29, the market got saturated and all the profit
per unit is gone. Artificial manipulation did not let the market be driven by economies of scale in
HD tuners.

It would be very difficult for the CEA to explain why the tuner for a 13" TV could now be priced at
$30 while the one for a plasma is $1000, and the average of 40" up set tuners is about $500 on 2005
lines.

It seems that they have manipulated their profit opportunities so much to sell tuners at high prices
since 1998 that applying an opposite approach to low cost products in a very short term would make
it the manipulation too obvious, so they want all the time they can get to smooth out the looks of
the rip off.

Shapiro was asked the US manufacturers question by Congress a few weeks ago and to what can recall
his response was that actually US was well represented, perhaps Dale recorded the exact response.

I agree with you regarding obsolete equipment, but they are not alone, the FCC has a major part on
that, from unidirectional cable agreements on a bidirectional world, to the MPAA moving ponds with
analog component, DVI, HDMI and 1394, as well as DTCP, HDCP, and the Broadcast Flag. Did you know
that HDMI was introduced at about the same time the first DVI sets were introduced as future lines
at CES?, I think they beat the computer business with that one.

Best Regards,

Rodolfo La Maestra





-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Howard A. Blackstead
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 11:48 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV
PRICESAND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC


----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Hi, The CEA has its shorts in a knot, because of a proposed acceleration
of the conversion schedule...a conversion they have known was coming for
for many years. This while continuing to sell products they KNOW WITH
CERTAINTY are obsolete. Continued sale of these products, to an
unsuspecting, ill informed public has amounted to no less than fraud.

Actually, I wonder whom the CEA is fronting for? Manufacturers in China,
Japan, Korea, or Taiwan? As far as I know there are no manufacturers in
the US of any of their products. Why would retailers in the US be
impacted by an accelerated schedule for technical compliance to the well
known standard?

Of course, the CEA says the prices will go up...doesn't that mean that
profits will go up as well? I doubt that they are profit adverse.

Finally, the CEA claims that low-income persons will be adversely
impacted by buying equipment at a higher price than lower priced
obsolete equipment. Doesn't the sale of obsolete equipment impact them
more?

Howard in South Bend, where football practice will start in several
weeks.



On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 20:49 -0400, Hugh Campbell wrote:
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Thanks for that the info but the CEA could care less about Americans on low
> or fixed incomes. I agree that the time frame maybe too quick but what they
> should have addressed is the labeling of televisions currently being sold.
> That should go into effect immediately.
>
> Hugh
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> To: "HDTV Magazine" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:39 PM
> Subject: FW: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES
> AND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
>
>
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> >
> >
> > I missed all the tips messages of the last couple of days, lets see if
> > this one goes thru.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Rodolfo La Maestra
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Consumer Electronic Association
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:01 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES
> > AND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
> >
> >
> > FOR RELEASE
> > Contact: Jeff Joseph or Megan Pollock
> > tel: (703) 907-7664 tel: (703) 907-7668
> > e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected]
> > http://www.CE.org
> >
> > PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES AND DISRUPT
> > MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
> >
> > New Burdens on Smaller Sets Would Penalize Lower Income Consumers
> >
> > Arlington, Va., July 27, 2005 - Accelerating and expanding the
> > Federal Communications
> > Commission's (FCC) digital television tuner requirements will sharply
> > raise prices on smaller sized
> > television sets causing disruption in the marketplace and harming
> > low-income consumers, said the
> > Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) and the Consumer Electronics
> > Retailers Coalition (CERC)
> > today. The organizations expressed their concerns in comments filed today
> > with the FCC in response
> > to the Commission's Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) on
> > digital television (DTV)
> > receiving capability.
> >
> > In the FNPRM issued on June 9, 2005, the Commission proposes to
> > accelerate the current
> > mandated timetable for the inclusion of a DTV tuner in television sets of
> > all sizes from July 1,
> > 2007 to a completion date of no later than December 31, 2006. It further
> > proposes to extend the
> > digital tuner requirements to receivers with screen sizes of less than
> > 13-inches.
> >
> > In their filing, CEA and CERC cautioned that the accelerated date
> > would be extremely difficult
> > for manufacturers to meet. They added that if implemented, such a
> > requirement likely would cause a
> > sudden jump in prices, thereby putting smaller sets out of reach of
> > Americans with low or fixed
> > incomes.
> >
> > "Accelerating the tuner mandate deadlines for all sets would have the
> > unfortunate result of
> > decreasing the number of DTV tuners in the marketplace, which clearly does
> > not further the goals of
> > the Commission nor the goals of the DTV transition as a whole," said CEA
> > President and CEO Gary
> > Shapiro. "By contrast, the current and anticipated July 2007 date allows
> > time for economies of
> > scale to develop fully. This will lessen the sticker shock for consumers,
> > allowing these products a
> > chance to compete against less expensive, tuner-less alternatives."
> >
> > In their comments, CEA and CERC explained that there is insufficient
> > basis for the Commission
> > to depart from the existing July 1, 2007 date pertaining to TV receivers
> > with screen sizes of 13 to
> > 24-inches. This date has been relied upon in the product and resource
> > planning of manufacturers and
> > in the merchandising and marketing plans of retailers. Moreover, a change
> > in this date to a date
> > any earlier than March 1, 2007, would be not only unwarranted; it would be
> > infeasible for the
> > general population of TV receiver manufacturers, who require a minimum of
> > 18 to 24 months to plan,
> > develop and deploy new equipment. Even if manufacturers were able to meet
> > a foreshortened
> > production schedule, a date any earlier than March 2007 could result in a
> > complete inability for
> > many manufacturers to produce products in this category, and cost
> > increases for those that do become
> > available, that the marketplace would be unlikely to sustain.
> >
> > "This development would defeat the purpose of the tuner mandate
> > itself," said Shapiro.
> >
> > CEA and CERC noted that current market forces and the regulatory
> > regime to date have proven
> > successful. CEA forecasts that the industry will this year sell 9 million
> > DTVs with an integrated
> > over-the-air (OTA) digital tuner, 16.7 million in 2006, 27 million in 2007
> > and 33 million in 2008.
> > By 2009 CEA projects that 97 million DTV tuners will have been sold,
> > translating to 86 percent U.S.
> > household penetration of OTA tuners.
> >
> > With respect to new receivers with screen sizes less than 13-inches,
> > CEA and CERC explained
> > that since the deadline on sets 13- to 25-inches has not taken effect it
> > would be difficult to know
> > at present, the feasibility and practicality of including DTV tuners in
> > TVs under 13-inchs. They
> > noted that it currently appears that the cost and development burdens on
> > manufacturers, and the
> > impact on consumers, would outweigh any possible benefits.
> >
> > While the FNPRM did not address the issue of product labeling and the
> > need for manufactures
> > and retailers to clearly label new TV sets to indicate whether they can
> > receive over-the-air DTV
> > signals or only off-the-air analog signals, CEA and CERC noted that, "TV
> > receivers with digital
> > tuning capability are, by and large, clearly identified as such in
> > advertising and point of display
> > materials. The main issue is not if labeling is occurring but whether
> > consumers can determine for
> > themselves under what circumstances they will need a tuner for digital OTA
> > signals."
> >
> > "CEA will continue to work closely with the FCC as further actions
> > are taken to help complete
> > the successful transition to DTV," concluded Shapiro.
> >
> > About CEA:
> > The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) is the preeminent trade
> > association promoting
> > growth in the consumer technology industry through technology policy,
> > events, research, promotion
> > and the fostering of business and strategic relationships. CEA represents
> > more than 2,000 corporate
> > members involved in the design, development, manufacturing, distribution
> > and integration of audio,
> > video, mobile electronics, wireless and landline communications,
> > information technology, home
> > networking, multimedia and accessory products, as well as related services
> > that are sold through
> > consumer channels. Combined, CEA's members account for more than $121
> > billion in annual sales.
> > CEA's resources are available online at www.CE.org, the definitive source
> > for information about the
> > consumer electronics industry.
> > CEA also sponsors and manages the International CES - Defining
> > Tomorrow's Technology. All
> > profits from CES are reinvested into industry services, including
> > technical training and education,
> > industry promotion, engineering standards development, market research and
> > legislative advocacy.
> >
> > UPCOMING EVENTS
> >
> >
> > * 2005 CEA Summer Technology and
> > Standards Forum
> > July 25-29, 2005, Denver, CO
> > * CEA Industry Forum
> > October 17-19, 2005, Las Vegas, NV
> > * EHX Fall 2005
> > November 7-11, 2005, Anaheim, CA
> > * CES New York Press Preview
> > November 15, 2005, New York, NY
> > * CES Unveiled: The Official Press Event of CES
> > January 3, 2006, Las Vegas, NV
> > * 2006 International CES
> > January 5-8, 2006, Las Vegas, NV
> > * Winter Summit 2006
> > March 2-4, 2006, Vail, CO
> > * CEA 2006 Winter Technology and
> > Standards Forum
> > March 6-10, 2006, Clearwater Beach, FL
> > * CEA Spring Break
> > March 14-17, 2006, Washington, DC
> > * 2006 PARA Conference
> > May 3-7, 2006, Hilton Head, SC
> > * 2006 Consumer Electronics CEO Summit
> > June 21-23, 2006, Southampton, Bermuda
> > * 2006 SINOCES
> > July 7-10, 2006, Qingdao, China
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
> >
> > To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> > day) send an email to:
> > [email protected]
> >
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
> [email protected]


To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]


To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

7/27/2005 12:27pm ct

Rodolfo,

I still believe that when the tuner mandate fully takes
effect, prices will not go up and will continue to go down at the
same rate prevalent at that time.
They want to sell those TVs and a little thing like a
mass-produced tuner isn't going to get in their way.
It should have happened earlier. Every retail TV set should
be capable of receiving OTA for public safety and national
defense. Then there are the convenient options it also offers.
As for the quality of the tuner, some will suffer; but most
will continue to improve. The profit is in volume. Ask Wal-Mart... and China.

Best,
Robert

At 12:00 AM 7/28/2005, you wrote:
>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>Howard,
>
>Good points.
>
>Allow me to give some perspective.
>
>A 13" set that will double up its price due to the integration of an
>ATSC tuner would increase
>abnormally the sale price of an otherwise low cost product (a
>product that low income people could
>not afford anymore).
>
>That will force a manufacturer to stop producing such product
>because it would not sell, otherwise,
>if ignoring the mandate, they would be in a non-compliant position
>excluding the tuner to sell at a
>marketable price. This applies to a $20 VHS VCR that would have to
>incorporate such tuner as well
>(because it has an NTSC tuner on it).
>
>By maintaining the original schedule the CEA is showing an image
>that tuner prices will come down
>significantly within the deadline due to economies of scale, and I
>comment: a situation not seen
>since 1998; if in 7 years it did not happen it is obvious they were
>controlling the prices up until
>even today, look at the 50" plasma Elite monitor vs. integrated TV,
>$1000 difference MSRP, quite a
>tuner one might say, reason by which all monitors in BO are sold out
>and the integrated plasmas have
>a $500 rebate to entice uninformed people.
>
>In other words, high selling prices of STBs and integrated tuners
>was a good business proposition,
>and much better when mandated by the FCC. We experienced a similar
>scenario when simple DVD
>players were selling for over $500, now dumped to $29, the market
>got saturated and all the profit
>per unit is gone. Artificial manipulation did not let the market be
>driven by economies of scale in
>HD tuners.
>
>It would be very difficult for the CEA to explain why the tuner for
>a 13" TV could now be priced at
>$30 while the one for a plasma is $1000, and the average of 40" up
>set tuners is about $500 on 2005
>lines.
>
>It seems that they have manipulated their profit opportunities so
>much to sell tuners at high prices
>since 1998 that applying an opposite approach to low cost products
>in a very short term would make
>it the manipulation too obvious, so they want all the time they can
>get to smooth out the looks of
>the rip off.
>
>Shapiro was asked the US manufacturers question by Congress a few
>weeks ago and to what can recall
>his response was that actually US was well represented, perhaps Dale
>recorded the exact response.
>
>I agree with you regarding obsolete equipment, but they are not
>alone, the FCC has a major part on
>that, from unidirectional cable agreements on a bidirectional world,
>to the MPAA moving ponds with
>analog component, DVI, HDMI and 1394, as well as DTCP, HDCP, and the
>Broadcast Flag. Did you know
>that HDMI was introduced at about the same time the first DVI sets
>were introduced as future lines
>at CES?, I think they beat the computer business with that one.
>
>Best Regards,
>
>Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>Howard A. Blackstead
>Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 11:48 PM
>To: HDTV Magazine
>Subject: Re: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV
>PRICESAND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
>
>
>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>Hi, The CEA has its shorts in a knot, because of a proposed acceleration
>of the conversion schedule...a conversion they have known was coming for
>for many years. This while continuing to sell products they KNOW WITH
>CERTAINTY are obsolete. Continued sale of these products, to an
>unsuspecting, ill informed public has amounted to no less than fraud.
>
>Actually, I wonder whom the CEA is fronting for? Manufacturers in China,
>Japan, Korea, or Taiwan? As far as I know there are no manufacturers in
>the US of any of their products. Why would retailers in the US be
>impacted by an accelerated schedule for technical compliance to the well
>known standard?
>
>Of course, the CEA says the prices will go up...doesn't that mean that
>profits will go up as well? I doubt that they are profit adverse.
>
>Finally, the CEA claims that low-income persons will be adversely
>impacted by buying equipment at a higher price than lower priced
>obsolete equipment. Doesn't the sale of obsolete equipment impact them
>more?
>
>Howard in South Bend, where football practice will start in several
>weeks.
>
>
>
>On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 20:49 -0400, Hugh Campbell wrote:
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > Thanks for that the info but the CEA could care less about Americans on low
> > or fixed incomes. I agree that the time frame maybe too quick
> but what they
> > should have addressed is the labeling of televisions currently being sold.
> > That should go into effect immediately.
> >
> > Hugh
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> > To: "HDTV Magazine" <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:39 PM
> > Subject: FW: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES
> > AND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
> >
> >
> > > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I missed all the tips messages of the last couple of days, lets see if
> > > this one goes thru.
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > >
> > > Rodolfo La Maestra
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Consumer Electronic Association
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:01 PM
> > > To: [email protected]
> > > Subject: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES
> > > AND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
> > >
> > >
> > > FOR RELEASE
> > > Contact: Jeff Joseph or Megan Pollock
> > > tel: (703) 907-7664 tel: (703) 907-7668
> > > e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected]
> > > http://www.CE.org
> > >
> > > PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES AND DISRUPT
> > > MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
> > >
> > > New Burdens on Smaller Sets Would Penalize Lower Income Consumers
> > >
> > > Arlington, Va., July 27, 2005 - Accelerating and expanding the
> > > Federal Communications
> > > Commission's (FCC) digital television tuner requirements will sharply
> > > raise prices on smaller sized
> > > television sets causing disruption in the marketplace and harming
> > > low-income consumers, said the
> > > Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) and the Consumer Electronics
> > > Retailers Coalition (CERC)
> > > today. The organizations expressed their concerns in comments
> filed today
> > > with the FCC in response
> > > to the Commission's Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) on
> > > digital television (DTV)
> > > receiving capability.
> > >
> > > In the FNPRM issued on June 9, 2005, the Commission proposes to
> > > accelerate the current
> > > mandated timetable for the inclusion of a DTV tuner in television sets of
> > > all sizes from July 1,
> > > 2007 to a completion date of no later than December 31, 2006. It further
> > > proposes to extend the
> > > digital tuner requirements to receivers with screen sizes of less than
> > > 13-inches.
> > >
> > > In their filing, CEA and CERC cautioned that the accelerated date
> > > would be extremely difficult
> > > for manufacturers to meet. They added that if implemented, such a
> > > requirement likely would cause a
> > > sudden jump in prices, thereby putting smaller sets out of reach of
> > > Americans with low or fixed
> > > incomes.
> > >
> > > "Accelerating the tuner mandate deadlines for all sets
> would have the
> > > unfortunate result of
> > > decreasing the number of DTV tuners in the marketplace, which
> clearly does
> > > not further the goals of
> > > the Commission nor the goals of the DTV transition as a whole," said CEA
> > > President and CEO Gary
> > > Shapiro. "By contrast, the current and anticipated July 2007 date allows
> > > time for economies of
> > > scale to develop fully. This will lessen the sticker shock for
> consumers,
> > > allowing these products a
> > > chance to compete against less expensive, tuner-less alternatives."
> > >
> > > In their comments, CEA and CERC explained that there is insufficient
> > > basis for the Commission
> > > to depart from the existing July 1, 2007 date pertaining to TV receivers
> > > with screen sizes of 13 to
> > > 24-inches. This date has been relied upon in the product and resource
> > > planning of manufacturers and
> > > in the merchandising and marketing plans of
> retailers. Moreover, a change
> > > in this date to a date
> > > any earlier than March 1, 2007, would be not only unwarranted;
> it would be
> > > infeasible for the
> > > general population of TV receiver manufacturers, who require a minimum of
> > > 18 to 24 months to plan,
> > > develop and deploy new equipment. Even if manufacturers were
> able to meet
> > > a foreshortened
> > > production schedule, a date any earlier than March 2007 could result in a
> > > complete inability for
> > > many manufacturers to produce products in this category, and cost
> > > increases for those that do become
> > > available, that the marketplace would be unlikely to sustain.
> > >
> > > "This development would defeat the purpose of the tuner mandate
> > > itself," said Shapiro.
> > >
> > > CEA and CERC noted that current market forces and the regulatory
> > > regime to date have proven
> > > successful. CEA forecasts that the industry will this year
> sell 9 million
> > > DTVs with an integrated
> > > over-the-air (OTA) digital tuner, 16.7 million in 2006, 27
> million in 2007
> > > and 33 million in 2008.
> > > By 2009 CEA projects that 97 million DTV tuners will have been sold,
> > > translating to 86 percent U.S.
> > > household penetration of OTA tuners.
> > >
> > > With respect to new receivers with screen sizes less than 13-inches,
> > > CEA and CERC explained
> > > that since the deadline on sets 13- to 25-inches has not taken effect it
> > > would be difficult to know
> > > at present, the feasibility and practicality of including DTV tuners in
> > > TVs under 13-inchs. They
> > > noted that it currently appears that the cost and development burdens on
> > > manufacturers, and the
> > > impact on consumers, would outweigh any possible benefits.
> > >
> > > While the FNPRM did not address the issue of product
> labeling and the
> > > need for manufactures
> > > and retailers to clearly label new TV sets to indicate whether they can
> > > receive over-the-air DTV
> > > signals or only off-the-air analog signals, CEA and CERC noted that, "TV
> > > receivers with digital
> > > tuning capability are, by and large, clearly identified as such in
> > > advertising and point of display
> > > materials. The main issue is not if labeling is occurring but whether
> > > consumers can determine for
> > > themselves under what circumstances they will need a tuner for
> digital OTA
> > > signals."
> > >
> > > "CEA will continue to work closely with the FCC as further actions
> > > are taken to help complete
> > > the successful transition to DTV," concluded Shapiro.
> > >
> > > About CEA:
> > > The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) is the preeminent trade
> > > association promoting
> > > growth in the consumer technology industry through technology policy,
> > > events, research, promotion
> > > and the fostering of business and strategic relationships. CEA
> represents
> > > more than 2,000 corporate
> > > members involved in the design, development, manufacturing, distribution
> > > and integration of audio,
> > > video, mobile electronics, wireless and landline communications,
> > > information technology, home
> > > networking, multimedia and accessory products, as well as
> related services
> > > that are sold through
> > > consumer channels. Combined, CEA's members account for more than $121
> > > billion in annual sales.
> > > CEA's resources are available online at www.CE.org, the definitive source
> > > for information about the
> > > consumer electronics industry.
> > > CEA also sponsors and manages the International CES - Defining
> > > Tomorrow's Technology. All
> > > profits from CES are reinvested into industry services, including
> > > technical training and education,
> > > industry promotion, engineering standards development, market
> research and
> > > legislative advocacy.
> > >
> > > UPCOMING EVENTS
> > >
> > >
> > > * 2005 CEA Summer Technology and
> > > Standards Forum
> > > July 25-29, 2005, Denver, CO
> > > * CEA Industry Forum
> > > October 17-19, 2005, Las Vegas, NV
> > > * EHX Fall 2005
> > > November 7-11, 2005, Anaheim, CA
> > > * CES New York Press Preview
> > > November 15, 2005, New York, NY
> > > * CES Unveiled: The Official Press Event of CES
> > > January 3, 2006, Las Vegas, NV
> > > * 2006 International CES
> > > January 5-8, 2006, Las Vegas, NV
> > > * Winter Summit 2006
> > > March 2-4, 2006, Vail, CO
> > > * CEA 2006 Winter Technology and
> > > Standards Forum
> > > March 6-10, 2006, Clearwater Beach, FL
> > > * CEA Spring Break
> > > March 14-17, 2006, Washington, DC
> > > * 2006 PARA Conference
> > > May 3-7, 2006, Hilton Head, SC
> > > * 2006 Consumer Electronics CEO Summit
> > > June 21-23, 2006, Southampton, Bermuda
> > > * 2006 SINOCES
> > > July 7-10, 2006, Qingdao, China
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
> > >
> > > To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all
> posted that same
> > > day) send an email to:
> > > [email protected]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
> >
> > To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted
> that same day) send an email to:
> > [email protected]
>
>
>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted
>that same day) send an email to:
>[email protected]
>
>
>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted
>that same day) send an email to:
>[email protected]



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

IMHO the tuner mandate is another instance of the government making
requirements of manufacturers that are not needed and in this case a
complete waist of tome and money.

The majority TV owners will not want a Master TV Antennae system nor will
they have the ability to install and functionally be able to watch multiple
OTA digital channels, it's just to complicated for your typical home owners,
it's , quite frankly a little to complicated for your "so called" experts.

With out involving a rotor and tuning/de-tuning to pick up various channels
with in the tolerances of the receivers thresholds and the complication that
involves just the idea of amplification and/or padding (attenuating) is more
than most folks can bear.

What's needed is a broadband amplifier with individual gain control and
attenuation for each digital channel but can you imagine what that would
cost. And you'll still probably need a rotor to automatically maximize
antennae gain for the week stations.

Now what typical home owner wants to pay for and install this stuff?

We folks on the tips are a rare minority and we have to remember that, we
can't speak for the majority because our wants and need are far different
than the main stream Americans wants and needs.

The tuner mandate IMHO is a waist of money and 99.9% of those tuners will
never be used.

And TV manufacturers will start offering "Monitors" in lieu of "TV's"
because that's all most anyone needs with cable or satellite unless you

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

I agree with Dan on the tuner mandate being completely pointless.

The fact is, among the various TV-related lobbies (broadcasters, cable,
satellite, Hollywood, manufacturers), the manufacturers are easily the
weakest and most uncoordinated group. It's clear they don't have anywhere
near the clout of these other groups. For example, politicians even on their
best days run absolutely shit-scared of the NAB. And while Hollywood may
have to take some token jabs for peddling "sex and violence" during election
season, our elected representatives trail only very slightly behind aspiring
starlets in their readiness to kneel down and pay homage.

I think it's also relevant that the manufacturers are the easiest group to
push around because virtually none of them are US companies. To apply a
sports analogy, it's like a free shot on goal.

As far as labeling analog sets in a way that advertises their pending
obsolescence, I think you have to at least consider this from a big picture
perspective.

At the outset, broadcasters did everything they could to slow-roll the
transition to digital television, if not kill it outright, including most
famously Sinclair's attempts to torpedo the over-the-air part of the ATSC
standard. Then there's Hollywood, where both legitimate concerns and
paranoid fantasies about copyright theft have made hardware requirements a
moving target over the past 7 years.

In that sort of climate, why in the world would manufacturers want to do
ANYTHING that would suggest to consumers that low-priced analog sets are
going to have a limited life without the addition of an external tuner?
Until very recently, the worst-case scenario was that digital television
would be DOA, so prematurely handing out death sentences to analog hardware
would be pretty reckless on the part of the manufacturers -- unless a major
element of their business strategy was to entirely exit the business of TV
manufacturing.

In the end, there's no shortage of villains in the digital television
transition. But I think the biggest villain has been Congress and the FCC,
who together have been managing the entire process in its tried and true
"let's just make this up as we go along" mentality.

Remember the recent Congressional hearings where none of the panel members
charged with overseeing this transition had even the foggiest notion of what
DTV is? These clowns couldn't find their way to the circus, much less
oversee something as complicated and ambiguous as changing the national
television standard.

The transition to digital television is a brilliant example of why
government should NEVER be involved in setting industrial policy. Although
it might have taken even longer to get HDTV to the so-called "tipping
point," I think we'd all be a lot better off in the long haul if the
development of HDTV had been market-driven, rather than administered by
Beltway halfwits.

Regards,


Doug
Clearly Resolved Image & Sound

Business: +1 (618) 234-2865
Cell: +1 (314) 495-2993

eMail: [email protected]
Web: http://www.clearlyresolved.com

Affiliated with the Imaging Science Foundation
http://www.imagingscience.com

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Dan Vining
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 6:26
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICESAND
DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

IMHO the tuner mandate is another instance of the government making
requirements of manufacturers that are not needed and in this case a
complete waist of tome and money.

The majority TV owners will not want a Master TV Antennae system nor will
they have the ability to install and functionally be able to watch multiple
OTA digital channels, it's just to complicated for your typical home owners,
it's , quite frankly a little to complicated for your "so called" experts.

With out involving a rotor and tuning/de-tuning to pick up various channels
with in the tolerances of the receivers thresholds and the complication that
involves just the idea of amplification and/or padding (attenuating) is more
than most folks can bear.

What's needed is a broadband amplifier with individual gain control and
attenuation for each digital channel but can you imagine what that would
cost. And you'll still probably need a rotor to automatically maximize
antennae gain for the week stations.

Now what typical home owner wants to pay for and install this stuff?

We folks on the tips are a rare minority and we have to remember that, we
can't speak for the majority because our wants and need are far different
than the main stream Americans wants and needs.

The tuner mandate IMHO is a waist of money and 99.9% of those tuners will
never be used.

And TV manufacturers will start offering "Monitors" in lieu of "TV's"
because that's all most anyone needs with cable or satellite unless you're
an enthusiast with to much time on your hands.



------------------------------------
Vining Audio & Video
Daniel R. Vining
LLC Member
[email protected]
30 Spring Street
Danbury, CT 06810
tel: 203 790-8450
fax: 203 790-8450
mobile: 203 470-2667
www.viningaudio.com
------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Robert Wade Brown
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 1:36 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICESAND
DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

7/27/2005 12:27pm ct

Rodolfo,

I still believe that when the tuner mandate fully takes
effect, prices will not go up and will continue to go down at the
same rate prevalent at that time.
They want to sell those TVs and a little thing like a
mass-produced tuner isn't going to get in their way.
It should have happened earlier. Every retail TV set should
be capable of receiving OTA for public safety and national
defense. Then there are the convenient options it also offers.
As for the quality of the tuner, some will suffer; but most
will continue to improve. The profit is in volume. Ask Wal-Mart... and
China.

Best,
Robert

At 12:00 AM 7/28/2005, you wrote:
>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>Howard,
>
>Good points.
>
>Allow me to give some perspective.
>
>A 13" set that will double up its price due to the integration of an
>ATSC tuner would increase
>abnormally the sale price of an otherwise low cost product (a
>product that low income people could
>not afford anymore).
>
>That will force a manufacturer to stop producing such product
>because it would not sell, otherwise,
>if ignoring the mandate, they would be in a non-compliant position
>excluding the tuner to sell at a
>marketable price. This applies to a $20 VHS VCR that would have to
>incorporate such tuner as well
>(because it has an NTSC tuner on it).
>
>By maintaining the original schedule the CEA is showing an image
>that tuner prices will come down
>significantly within the deadline due to economies of scale, and I
>comment: a situation not seen
>since 1998; if in 7 years it did not happen it is obvious they were
>controlling the prices up until
>even today, look at the 50" plasma Elite monitor vs. integrated TV,
>$1000 difference MSRP, quite a
>tuner one might say, reason by which all monitors in BO are sold out
>and the integrated plasmas have
>a $500 rebate to entice uninformed people.
>
>In other words, high selling prices of STBs and integrated tuners
>was a good business proposition,
>and much better when mandated by the FCC. We experienced a similar
>scenario when simple DVD
>players were selling for over $500, now dumped to $29, the market
>got saturated and all the profit
>per unit is gone. Artificial manipulation did not let the market be
>driven by economies of scale in
>HD tuners.
>
>It would be very difficult for the CEA to explain why the tuner for
>a 13" TV could now be priced at
>$30 while the one for a plasma is $1000, and the average of 40" up
>set tuners is about $500 on 2005
>lines.
>
>It seems that they have manipulated their profit opportunities so
>much to sell tuners at high prices
>since 1998 that applying an opposite approach to low cost products
>in a very short term would make
>it the manipulation too obvious, so they want all the time they can
>get to smooth out the looks of
>the rip off.
>
>Shapiro was asked the US manufacturers question by Congress a few
>weeks ago and to what can recall
>his response was that actually US was well represented, perhaps Dale
>recorded the exact response.
>
>I agree with you regarding obsolete equipment, but they are not
>alone, the FCC has a major part on
>that, from unidirectional cable agreements on a bidirectional world,
>to the MPAA moving ponds with
>analog component, DVI, HDMI and 1394, as well as DTCP, HDCP, and the
>Broadcast Flag. Did you know
>that HDMI was introduced at about the same time the first DVI sets
>were introduced as future lines
>at CES?, I think they beat the computer business with that one.
>
>Best Regards,
>
>Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>Howard A. Blackstead
>Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 11:48 PM
>To: HDTV Magazine
>Subject: Re: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV
>PRICESAND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
>
>
>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>Hi, The CEA has its shorts in a knot, because of a proposed acceleration
>of the conversion schedule...a conversion they have known was coming for
>for many years. This while continuing to sell products they KNOW WITH
>CERTAINTY are obsolete. Continued sale of these products, to an
>unsuspecting, ill informed public has amounted to no less than fraud.
>
>Actually, I wonder whom the CEA is fronting for? Manufacturers in China,
>Japan, Korea, or Taiwan? As far as I know there are no manufacturers in
>the US of any of their products. Why would retailers in the US be
>impacted by an accelerated schedule for technical compliance to the well
>known standard?
>
>Of course, the CEA says the prices will go up...doesn't that mean that
>profits will go up as well? I doubt that they are profit adverse.
>
>Finally, the CEA claims that low-income persons will be adversely
>impacted by buying equipment at a higher price than lower priced
>obsolete equipment. Doesn't the sale of obsolete equipment impact them
>more?
>
>Howard in South Bend, where football practice will start in several
>weeks.
>
>
>
>On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 20:49 -0400, Hugh Campbell wrote:
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > Thanks for that the info but the CEA could care less about Americans on
low
> > or fixed incomes. I agree that the time frame maybe too quick
> but what they
> > should have addressed is the labeling of televisions currently being
sold.
> > That should go into effect immediately.
> >
> > Hugh
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> > To: "HDTV Magazine" <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:39 PM
> > Subject: FW: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV
PRICES
> > AND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
> >
> >
> > > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I missed all the tips messages of the last couple of days, lets see if
> > > this one goes thru.
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > >
> > > Rodolfo La Maestra
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Consumer Electronic Association

> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:01 PM
> > > To: [email protected]
> > > Subject: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES
> > > AND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
> > >
> > >
> > > FOR RELEASE
> > > Contact: Jeff Joseph or Megan Pollock
> > > tel: (703) 907-7664 tel: (703) 907-7668
> > > e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected]
> > > http://www.CE.org
> > >
> > > PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICES AND
DISRUPT
> > > MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
> > >
> > > New Burdens on Smaller Sets Would Penalize Lower Income Consumers
> > >
> > > Arlington, Va., July 27, 2005 - Accelerating and expanding the
> > > Federal Communications
> > > Commission's (FCC) digital television tuner requirements will sharply
> > > raise prices on smaller sized
> > > television sets causing disruption in the marketplace and harming
> > > low-income consumers, said the
> > > Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) and the Consumer Electronics
> > > Retailers Coalition (CERC)
> > > today. The organizations expressed their concerns in comments
> filed today
> > > with the FCC in response
> > > to the Commission's Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) on
> > > digital television (DTV)
> > > receiving capability.
> > >
> > > In the FNPRM issued on June 9, 2005, the Commission proposes to
> > > accelerate the current
> > > mandated timetable for the inclusion of a DTV tuner in television sets
of
> > > all sizes from July 1,
> > > 2007 to a completion date of no later than December 31, 2006. It
further
> > > proposes to extend the
> > > digital tuner requirements to receivers with screen sizes of less than
> > > 13-inches.
> > >
> > > In their filing, CEA and CERC cautioned that the accelerated date
> > > would be extremely difficult
> > > for manufacturers to meet. They added that if implemented, such a
> > > requirement likely would cause a
> > > sudden jump in prices, thereby putting smaller sets out of reach of
> > > Americans with low or fixed
> > > incomes.
> > >
> > > "Accelerating the tuner mandate deadlines for all sets
> would have the
> > > unfortunate result of
> > > decreasing the number of DTV tuners in the marketplace, which
> clearly does
> > > not further the goals of
> > > the Commission nor the goals of the DTV transition as a whole," said
CEA
> > > President and CEO Gary
> > > Shapiro. "By contrast, the current and anticipated July 2007 date
allows
> > > time for economies of
> > > scale to develop fully. This will lessen the sticker shock for
> consumers,
> > > allowing these products a
> > > chance to compete against less expensive, tuner-less alternatives."
> > >
> > > In their comments, CEA and CERC explained that there is
insufficient
> > > basis for the Commission
> > > to depart from the existing July 1, 2007 date pertaining to TV
receivers
> > > with screen sizes of 13 to
> > > 24-inches. This date has been relied upon in the product and resource
> > > planning of manufacturers and
> > > in the merchandising and marketing plans of
> retailers. Moreover, a change
> > > in this date to a date
> > > any earlier than March 1, 2007, would be not only unwarranted;
> it would be
> > > infeasible for the
> > > general population of TV receiver manufacturers, who require a minimum
of
> > > 18 to 24 months to plan,
> > > develop and deploy new equipment. Even if manufacturers were
> able to meet
> > > a foreshortened
> > > production schedule, a date any earlier than March 2007 could result
in a
> > > complete inability for
> > > many manufacturers to produce products in this category, and cost
> > > increases for those that do become
> > > available, that the marketplace would be unlikely to sustain.
> > >
> > > "This development would defeat the purpose of the tuner mandate
> > > itself," said Shapiro.
> > >
> > > CEA and CERC noted that current market forces and the regulatory
> > > regime to date have proven
> > > successful. CEA forecasts that the industry will this year
> sell 9 million
> > > DTVs with an integrated
> > > over-the-air (OTA) digital tuner, 16.7 million in 2006, 27
> million in 2007
> > > and 33 million in 2008.
> > > By 2009 CEA projects that 97 million DTV tuners will have been sold,
> > > translating to 86 percent U.S.
> > > household penetration of OTA tuners.
> > >
> > > With respect to new receivers with screen sizes less than
13-inches,
> > > CEA and CERC explained
> > > that since the deadline on sets 13- to 25-inches has not taken effect
it
> > > would be difficult to know
> > > at present, the feasibility and practicality of including DTV tuners
in
> > > TVs under 13-inchs. They
> > > noted that it currently appears that the cost and development burdens
on
> > > manufacturers, and the
> > > impact on consumers, would outweigh any possible benefits.
> > >
> > > While the FNPRM did not address the issue of product
> labeling and the
> > > need for manufactures
> > > and retailers to clearly label new TV sets to indicate whether they
can
> > > receive over-the-air DTV
> > > signals or only off-the-air analog signals, CEA and CERC noted that,
"TV
> > > receivers with digital
> > > tuning capability are, by and large, clearly identified as such in
> > > advertising and point of display
> > > materials. The main issue is not if labeling is occurring but whether
> > > consumers can determine for
> > > themselves under what circumstances they will need a tuner for
> digital OTA
> > > signals."
> > >
> > > "CEA will continue to work closely with the FCC as further
actions
> > > are taken to help complete
> > > the successful transition to DTV," concluded Shapiro.
> > >
> > > About CEA:
> > > The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) is the preeminent
trade
> > > association promoting
> > > growth in the consumer technology industry through technology policy,
> > > events, research, promotion
> > > and the fostering of business and strategic relationships. CEA
> represents
> > > more than 2,000 corporate
> > > members involved in the design, development, manufacturing,
distribution
> > > and integration of audio,
> > > video, mobile electronics, wireless and landline communications,
> > > information technology, home
> > > networking, multimedia and accessory products, as well as
> related services
> > > that are sold through
> > > consumer channels. Combined, CEA's members account for more than $121
> > > billion in annual sales.
> > > CEA's resources are available online at www.CE.org, the definitive
source
> > > for information about the
> > > consumer electronics industry.
> > > CEA also sponsors and manages the International CES - Defining
> > > Tomorrow's Technology. All
> > > profits from CES are reinvested into industry services, including
> > > technical training and education,
> > > industry promotion, engineering standards development, market
> research and
> > > legislative advocacy.
> > >
> > > UPCOMING EVENTS
> > >
> > >
> > > * 2005 CEA Summer Technology and
> > > Standards Forum
> > > July 25-29, 2005, Denver, CO
> > > * CEA Industry Forum
> > > October 17-19, 2005, Las Vegas, NV
> > > * EHX Fall 2005
> > > November 7-11, 2005, Anaheim, CA
> > > * CES New York Press Preview
> > > November 15, 2005, New York, NY
> > > * CES Unveiled: The Official Press Event of CES
> > > January 3, 2006, Las Vegas, NV
> > > * 2006 International CES
> > > January 5-8, 2006, Las Vegas, NV
> > > * Winter Summit 2006
> > > March 2-4, 2006, Vail, CO
> > > * CEA 2006 Winter Technology and
> > > Standards Forum
> > > March 6-10, 2006, Clearwater Beach, FL
> > > * CEA Spring Break
> > > March 14-17, 2006, Washington, DC
> > > * 2006 PARA Conference
> > > May 3-7, 2006, Hilton Head, SC
> > > * 2006 Consumer Electronics CEO Summit
> > > June 21-23, 2006, Southampton, Bermuda
> > > * 2006 SINOCES
> > > July 7-10, 2006, Qingdao, China
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
> > >
> > > To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all
> posted that same
> > > day) send an email to:
> > > [email protected]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
> >
> > To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted
> that same day) send an email to:
> > [email protected]
>
>
>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted
>that same day) send an email to:
>[email protected]
>
>
>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted
>that same day) send an email to:
>[email protected]



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]

To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Dan,

Your proposal of

"And TV manufacturers will start offering "Monitors" in lieu of "TV's"
because that's all most anyone needs with cable or satellite unless you

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

This is what continues to stump me. It seems so easy for manufacturers
to skirt this issue. Let me make an example and you tell me where I'm
missing it:

1. Company A makes a plasma display with model number VX4300. It's a
plasma with no tuner, manufactured from 2003 - 2005, no DVI

2. Company A also has a plasma with model number VX5500, their higher
end line with more component inputs and DVI, and built in speakers, same
manufacturing date.

3. In 2005 they plan the release of a follow up to their more successful
VX5500 with higher resolution and HDMI input. In the development stage,
it's decided they don't want to include a tuner. So instead of naming it
the VX5600, they call it the VX4400 and don't include a tuner.

I just can't see the mandate being enforcable - it seems so easy for
companies to weasle out of it...

Jason Burroughs

-----Original Message-----


100% of the equipment that had an analog tuner must
have an ATSC tuner, displays or non-displays (VCRs, Tivos, etc).

Rodolfo La Maestra

To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Maybe I am missing something but in your example the VX4400 would have to
have a tuner. If they mfg it after a certain date and it's at least "X"
inches in size it shall have a tuner. Calling it a different model number
should not have anything to do with it.

Hugh


----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]>
To: "HDTV Magazine" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV PRICESAND
DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC


----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

This is what continues to stump me. It seems so easy for manufacturers
to skirt this issue. Let me make an example and you tell me where I'm
missing it:

1. Company A makes a plasma display with model number VX4300. It's a
plasma with no tuner, manufactured from 2003 - 2005, no DVI

2. Company A also has a plasma with model number VX5500, their higher
end line with more component inputs and DVI, and built in speakers, same
manufacturing date.

3. In 2005 they plan the release of a follow up to their more successful
VX5500 with higher resolution and HDMI input. In the development stage,
it's decided they don't want to include a tuner. So instead of naming it
the VX5600, they call it the VX4400 and don't include a tuner.

I just can't see the mandate being enforcable - it seems so easy for
companies to weasle out of it...

Jason Burroughs

-----Original Message-----


100% of the equipment that had an analog tuner must
have an ATSC tuner, displays or non-displays (VCRs, Tivos, etc).

Rodolfo La Maestra

To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

I believe what he meant was that the manufacturers might start producing
monitors with no NTSC or ATSC tuner. Correct me if I am wrong but, they
do not have to include an ATSC tuner if there is no tuner in the
monitor.

Bob

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
Of Hugh Campbell
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 10:54 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV
PRICESAND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Maybe I am missing something but in your example the VX4400 would have
to
have a tuner. If they mfg it after a certain date and it's at least "X"

inches in size it shall have a tuner. Calling it a different model
number
should not have anything to do with it.

Hugh


----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]>
To: "HDTV Magazine" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV
PRICESAND
DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC


----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

This is what continues to stump me. It seems so easy for manufacturers
to skirt this issue. Let me make an example and you tell me where I'm
missing it:

1. Company A makes a plasma display with model number VX4300. It's a
plasma with no tuner, manufactured from 2003 - 2005, no DVI

2. Company A also has a plasma with model number VX5500, their higher
end line with more component inputs and DVI, and built in speakers, same
manufacturing date.

3. In 2005 they plan the release of a follow up to their more successful
VX5500 with higher resolution and HDMI input. In the development stage,
it's decided they don't want to include a tuner. So instead of naming it
the VX5600, they call it the VX4400 and don't include a tuner.

I just can't see the mandate being enforcable - it seems so easy for
companies to weasle out of it...

Jason Burroughs

-----Original Message-----


100% of the equipment that had an analog tuner must
have an ATSC tuner, displays or non-displays (VCRs, Tivos, etc).

Rodolfo La Maestra

To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
same day) send an email to:
[email protected]



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Integrated tuner = television. No tuner = monitor

I don't see the manufacturers risking a loss of market share by forgoing the
ATSC tuners and I think that testimony is crying wolf.

I also do not see how one could expect a 13" to suddenly double in price.
You're taking a NTSC circuit and replacing it with an ATSC capable circuit.
The costs should only be marginally more expensive. Anybody pushing that
idea is bluffing and they will be exposed soon enough. Guarantee there are
Chinese and Korean builders hungry enough and not part of this CEA pitch who
will quickly pop up with cost effective sets that meet the law in attempt to
capitalize on someone else's laziness.

>From what I can tell the performance issues, particularly multipath, are
partly to blame for the slower drop in component prices. No one wants to
commit to silicon a tuner solution(chip) until they are very comfortable
with it's performance. Lots of talk about this 5th generation LG tuner. That
may spur the competition. A drop dead date will also encourage the chip
companies to get hot on design efforts because they know there will be
strong demand that has to be fed.

It's a joke for them to suggest 18-24 months are needed to push an ATSC set
to market. I've watched many a hardware tech startup in Silicon Valley go
from zero to shipping product in that timeframe and we're talking a much
more complicated product. It's a television, for crying out loud, and it's
not like these companies haven't been doing any R&D on the problem in the
last 10 years.

Bob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Robert Bullock
> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 8:01 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV
> PRICESAND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> I believe what he meant was that the manufacturers might start producing
> monitors with no NTSC or ATSC tuner. Correct me if I am wrong but, they
> do not have to include an ATSC tuner if there is no tuner in the
> monitor.
>
> Bob
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
> Of Hugh Campbell
> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 10:54 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV
> PRICESAND DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Maybe I am missing something but in your example the VX4400 would have
> to
> have a tuner. If they mfg it after a certain date and it's at least "X"
>
> inches in size it shall have a tuner. Calling it a different model
> number
> should not have anything to do with it.
>
> Hugh
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[email protected]>
> To: "HDTV Magazine" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 10:42 AM
> Subject: Re: PROPOSED NEW DTV TUNER MANDATE SCHEDULE WILL RAISE TV
> PRICESAND
> DISRUPT MARKET, SAY CEA AND CERC
>
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> This is what continues to stump me. It seems so easy for manufacturers
> to skirt this issue. Let me make an example and you tell me where I'm
> missing it:
>
> 1. Company A makes a plasma display with model number VX4300. It's a
> plasma with no tuner, manufactured from 2003 - 2005, no DVI
>
> 2. Company A also has a plasma with model number VX5500, their higher
> end line with more component inputs and DVI, and built in speakers, same
> manufacturing date.
>
> 3. In 2005 they plan the release of a follow up to their more successful
> VX5500 with higher resolution and HDMI input. In the development stage,
> it's decided they don't want to include a tuner. So instead of naming it
> the VX5600, they call it the VX4400 and don't include a tuner.
>
> I just can't see the mandate being enforcable - it seems so easy for
> companies to weasle out of it...
>
> Jason Burroughs
>



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]