|
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
It will be interesting to hear the wailing from the TV broadcast industry
and its advertisers after a huge audience is eliminated by forcing the insane HDTV nonsense down our throats in 2009. I for one am telling every advertiser I do business with that I will not see any of their ads after that date. Jeez, Louise...hundreds of thousands of homes in foreclosure, the ****tiest economy in my life, $4 for a lousy gallon of gas, a trip to the grocery store is a painfully expensive process and every one I know has been layed off. AND THESE PRICKS THINK WE'RE GOING TO RUSH OUT A BUY EQUIPMENT TO RECEIVE THEIR ASSININE DIGITAL SYSTEM? The ones to blame are those in Washington but equally culpable are the sycophants in the TV industry to sat by and allowed it to happen. I'm glad I'm not spending any money on TV advertising that few people will see after 2009. Besides, there are so few creative writers left in the industry that TV has had to rely on this insipid "reality" shows. Yawn. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
Dude if you have cable or satellite TV you don't need a digital converter.
It's only $49.00 and the government gives you a rebate or something. I think by now most people have one of the above services. That old roof top antenna delivers just a few stations anyway. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
|
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
H-m-m-m...
a $50 converter for each TV or... groceries. What a tough call to make, Dude. wrote in message ... Dude if you have cable or satellite TV you don't need a digital converter. It's only $49.00 and the government gives you a rebate or something. I think by now most people have one of the above services. That old roof top antenna delivers just a few stations anyway. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
|
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
Smokey wrote: H-m-m-m... a $50 converter for each TV or... groceries. What a tough call to make, Dude. And yet, they'll pay it. I've heard hundreds of stories about the "poor" who are out buying the latest and biggest TV sets. Gimme a break, for a lot of those folks, TV is the #1 priority. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
dxAce wrote:
Smokey wrote: H-m-m-m... a $50 converter for each TV or... groceries. What a tough call to make, Dude. And yet, they'll pay it. I've heard hundreds of stories about the "poor" who are out buying the latest and biggest TV sets. Gimme a break, for a lot of those folks, TV is the #1 priority. In the US, the poverty level is defined such that many of 'the poor' own homes, cars, have air conditioning, and not one, but two color TV's. The 'poor' in this country, do not live in tribal conditions in the veldt. I'm always amused when looking for garage sales on the weekend, to drive through low end neighborhoods, and count the number of highly accessorized high end cars and SUV's in front of tiny boxes that haven't been painted in this decade. And then drive through higher end neighborhoods and count the number of Chevy Cavaliers in front of McMansions. People live according to their priorities. And they often define quality living by the number of toys. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
D Peter Maus wrote: dxAce wrote: Smokey wrote: H-m-m-m... a $50 converter for each TV or... groceries. What a tough call to make, Dude. And yet, they'll pay it. I've heard hundreds of stories about the "poor" who are out buying the latest and biggest TV sets. Gimme a break, for a lot of those folks, TV is the #1 priority. In the US, the poverty level is defined such that many of 'the poor' own homes, cars, have air conditioning, and not one, but two color TV's. The 'poor' in this country, do not live in tribal conditions in the veldt. I'm always amused when looking for garage sales on the weekend, to drive through low end neighborhoods, and count the number of highly accessorized high end cars and SUV's in front of tiny boxes that haven't been painted in this decade. And then drive through higher end neighborhoods and count the number of Chevy Cavaliers in front of McMansions. People live according to their priorities. And they often define quality living by the number of toys. I like my 1977 Buick LeSabre.. still under 100,000 miles! |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
dxAce wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote: dxAce wrote: Smokey wrote: H-m-m-m... a $50 converter for each TV or... groceries. What a tough call to make, Dude. And yet, they'll pay it. I've heard hundreds of stories about the "poor" who are out buying the latest and biggest TV sets. Gimme a break, for a lot of those folks, TV is the #1 priority. In the US, the poverty level is defined such that many of 'the poor' own homes, cars, have air conditioning, and not one, but two color TV's. The 'poor' in this country, do not live in tribal conditions in the veldt. I'm always amused when looking for garage sales on the weekend, to drive through low end neighborhoods, and count the number of highly accessorized high end cars and SUV's in front of tiny boxes that haven't been painted in this decade. And then drive through higher end neighborhoods and count the number of Chevy Cavaliers in front of McMansions. People live according to their priorities. And they often define quality living by the number of toys. I like my 1977 Buick LeSabre.. still under 100,000 miles! No ****. Excellent. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
D Peter Maus wrote: dxAce wrote: D Peter Maus wrote: dxAce wrote: Smokey wrote: H-m-m-m... a $50 converter for each TV or... groceries. What a tough call to make, Dude. And yet, they'll pay it. I've heard hundreds of stories about the "poor" who are out buying the latest and biggest TV sets. Gimme a break, for a lot of those folks, TV is the #1 priority. In the US, the poverty level is defined such that many of 'the poor' own homes, cars, have air conditioning, and not one, but two color TV's. The 'poor' in this country, do not live in tribal conditions in the veldt. I'm always amused when looking for garage sales on the weekend, to drive through low end neighborhoods, and count the number of highly accessorized high end cars and SUV's in front of tiny boxes that haven't been painted in this decade. And then drive through higher end neighborhoods and count the number of Chevy Cavaliers in front of McMansions. People live according to their priorities. And they often define quality living by the number of toys. I like my 1977 Buick LeSabre.. still under 100,000 miles! No ****. Excellent. Yeah, and I bought it almost 5 years ago with 63K on it and brand new tires. Got it for $600. Actually owned by a 'little old lady' who passed away at 90+ years. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
dxAce wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote: dxAce wrote: D Peter Maus wrote: dxAce wrote: Smokey wrote: H-m-m-m... a $50 converter for each TV or... groceries. What a tough call to make, Dude. And yet, they'll pay it. I've heard hundreds of stories about the "poor" who are out buying the latest and biggest TV sets. Gimme a break, for a lot of those folks, TV is the #1 priority. In the US, the poverty level is defined such that many of 'the poor' own homes, cars, have air conditioning, and not one, but two color TV's. The 'poor' in this country, do not live in tribal conditions in the veldt. I'm always amused when looking for garage sales on the weekend, to drive through low end neighborhoods, and count the number of highly accessorized high end cars and SUV's in front of tiny boxes that haven't been painted in this decade. And then drive through higher end neighborhoods and count the number of Chevy Cavaliers in front of McMansions. People live according to their priorities. And they often define quality living by the number of toys. I like my 1977 Buick LeSabre.. still under 100,000 miles! No ****. Excellent. Yeah, and I bought it almost 5 years ago with 63K on it and brand new tires. Got it for $600. Actually owned by a 'little old lady' who passed away at 90+ years. That's a great find. I'm still looking for another Studebaker. I've had 3 over the years, and they've been about as trouble free as any car I've ever owned...and a lot of fun to drive. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
D Peter Maus wrote: dxAce wrote: D Peter Maus wrote: dxAce wrote: D Peter Maus wrote: dxAce wrote: Smokey wrote: H-m-m-m... a $50 converter for each TV or... groceries. What a tough call to make, Dude. And yet, they'll pay it. I've heard hundreds of stories about the "poor" who are out buying the latest and biggest TV sets. Gimme a break, for a lot of those folks, TV is the #1 priority. In the US, the poverty level is defined such that many of 'the poor' own homes, cars, have air conditioning, and not one, but two color TV's. The 'poor' in this country, do not live in tribal conditions in the veldt. I'm always amused when looking for garage sales on the weekend, to drive through low end neighborhoods, and count the number of highly accessorized high end cars and SUV's in front of tiny boxes that haven't been painted in this decade. And then drive through higher end neighborhoods and count the number of Chevy Cavaliers in front of McMansions. People live according to their priorities. And they often define quality living by the number of toys. I like my 1977 Buick LeSabre.. still under 100,000 miles! No ****. Excellent. Yeah, and I bought it almost 5 years ago with 63K on it and brand new tires. Got it for $600. Actually owned by a 'little old lady' who passed away at 90+ years. That's a great find. I'm still looking for another Studebaker. I've had 3 over the years, and they've been about as trouble free as any car I've ever owned...and a lot of fun to drive. Got lucky after the Dakota got crunched (and nearly me too), and I don't drive all that much anymore anyway. Seems as though I saw a Studebaker for sale down the road in the past few weeks. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
On Jul 30, 5:34 am, "Smokey" wrote:
It will be interesting to hear the wailing from the TV broadcast industry and its advertisers after a huge audience is eliminated by forcing the insane HDTV nonsense down our throats in 2009. I for one am telling every advertiser I do business with that I will not see any of their ads after that date. Jeez, Louise...hundreds of thousands of homes in foreclosure, the ****tiest economy in my life, $4 for a lousy gallon of gas, a trip to the grocery store is a painfully expensive process and every one I know has been layed off. AND THESE PRICKS THINK WE'RE GOING TO RUSH OUT A BUY EQUIPMENT TO RECEIVE THEIR ASSININE DIGITAL SYSTEM? The ones to blame are those in Washington but equally culpable are the sycophants in the TV industry to sat by and allowed it to happen. I'm glad I'm not spending any money on TV advertising that few people will see after 2009. Besides, there are so few creative writers left in the industry that TV has had to rely on this insipid "reality" shows. Yawn. Converter boxes begin at under $50 and the government will give you two $40 coupons, each coupon good for one box. The added channels you get is worth a lot more than the ten bucks. I see you can afford a computer and internet service, so what are you crying about? |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
wrote in message ... On Jul 30, 5:34 am, "Smokey" wrote: It will be interesting to hear the wailing from the TV broadcast industry and its advertisers after a huge audience is eliminated by forcing the insane HDTV nonsense down our throats in 2009. I for one am telling every advertiser I do business with that I will not see any of their ads after that date. Jeez, Louise...hundreds of thousands of homes in foreclosure, the ****tiest economy in my life, $4 for a lousy gallon of gas, a trip to the grocery store is a painfully expensive process and every one I know has been layed off. AND THESE PRICKS THINK WE'RE GOING TO RUSH OUT A BUY EQUIPMENT TO RECEIVE THEIR ASSININE DIGITAL SYSTEM? The ones to blame are those in Washington but equally culpable are the sycophants in the TV industry to sat by and allowed it to happen. I'm glad I'm not spending any money on TV advertising that few people will see after 2009. Besides, there are so few creative writers left in the industry that TV has had to rely on this insipid "reality" shows. Yawn. Converter boxes begin at under $50 and the government will give you two $40 coupons, each coupon good for one box. The added channels you get is worth a lot more than the ten bucks. I see you can afford a computer and internet service, so what are you crying about? The people he's referring to mostly do not have computers, internet service, cable TV.. they are people that live outside of urban areas that typically have very poor analog TV reception (gads, I've lived in so many of those places...) and will not be able to receive digital signals with or without a box. There are millions of these people out there that will simply lose their (admittedly marginal) TV reception altogether. Of course there are also a lot of little old ladies, etc. that can't afford cable that live in the cities, and will not buy the boxes, either (many are technophobes that can barely operate their analog sets... many still with old rotary tuners). The analog switch-off will indeed disenfranchise a large number of people across the country. But then, the stations don't care, because their advertisers don't care.. these are not the people being marketed to.. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
First, if you won't mind leaving your Fantasy Land for a moment.do you
really believe the force-feeding of digital TV has anything to do with enhancement of the television viewing experience? ! Good grief! You obviously are not paying attention. When we are all straightjacketed into digital TV the handcuffs will go on. Suddenly you will discover you cannot record TV shows or certain games off of broadcast TV because they've done the same thing to the video that they've done to copy guard DVDs. Then will come the encoding of certain games and programs. Only paying subscribers will be able to see them after phoning in their credit card number, thanks to the new digital TV system. Once done, a data burst will be broadcast on one of the digital sub carrier channels that will "unlock" the chip on a digital TV that is similar to the "IP" identifier on your computer (if you're running anything newer than a Pentium 3 processor). If you haven't paid up, your "IP" number will not appear in the string of others who have and, VOILA.you're S.O.L. Carry it one step further, sheeple. Like so many things today that are only "illusionary tests." "We'll see if this will fly before we try that." If they can sell making us all run out and buy pricey new TVs and converter boxes or subscribe to overpriced cable or satellite service (which will serve a double purpose of adding to the huge database dossier on ever citizen about television viewing habits and interests).ESPECIALLY IN THE ****TY ECONOMY THEY HAVE GIVEN US. it will be like shooting fish in a barrel to force us into buying new fuel-economy vehicles under threat of a tax on how fast your odometer rotates. So, yeah. Go ahead, embrace digital TV. Too bad the "big picture" you see on your new HDTV big screen is the furthest thing from the real "big picture" here. Did you REALLY think this was all about enhancement of the viewing experience? |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
On Jul 30, 5:56 pm, "Smokey" wrote:
Did you REALLY think this was all about enhancement of the viewing experience? For me it is. Several new channels (sub-channels) of programming already on the air. In fact, I watch the sub-channels more than the regular ones. No need to pay for satellite or cable. We are told that next year we could have over 80 channels (including subchannels) of programming to select from here in Central California. I'm getting networks I never heard of before with great programming. AND, I don't have a big screen HDTV. I watch a 20-inch analog tv and am getting the best reception ever. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
Brenda Ann wrote: wrote in message ... On Jul 30, 5:34 am, "Smokey" wrote: It will be interesting to hear the wailing from the TV broadcast industry and its advertisers after a huge audience is eliminated by forcing the insane HDTV nonsense down our throats in 2009. I for one am telling every advertiser I do business with that I will not see any of their ads after that date. Jeez, Louise...hundreds of thousands of homes in foreclosure, the ****tiest economy in my life, $4 for a lousy gallon of gas, a trip to the grocery store is a painfully expensive process and every one I know has been layed off. AND THESE PRICKS THINK WE'RE GOING TO RUSH OUT A BUY EQUIPMENT TO RECEIVE THEIR ASSININE DIGITAL SYSTEM? The ones to blame are those in Washington but equally culpable are the sycophants in the TV industry to sat by and allowed it to happen. I'm glad I'm not spending any money on TV advertising that few people will see after 2009. Besides, there are so few creative writers left in the industry that TV has had to rely on this insipid "reality" shows. Yawn. Converter boxes begin at under $50 and the government will give you two $40 coupons, each coupon good for one box. The added channels you get is worth a lot more than the ten bucks. I see you can afford a computer and internet service, so what are you crying about? The people he's referring to mostly do not have computers, internet service, cable TV.. they are people that live outside of urban areas that typically have very poor analog TV reception (gads, I've lived in so many of those places...) and will not be able to receive digital signals with or without a box. There are millions of these people out there that will simply lose their (admittedly marginal) TV reception altogether. Of course there are also a lot of little old ladies, etc. that can't afford cable that live in the cities, and will not buy the boxes, either (many are technophobes that can barely operate their analog sets... many still with old rotary tuners). The analog switch-off will indeed disenfranchise a large number of people across the country. But then, the stations don't care, because their advertisers don't care.. these are not the people being marketed to.. Hmmmm... seems as though we've heard that refrain before... wait! Isn't it 'Eduardo' who tells us all about those who don't matter, those who are not being marketed to? |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
wrote in message ... On Jul 30, 5:56 pm, "Smokey" wrote: Did you REALLY think this was all about enhancement of the viewing experience? For me it is. Several new channels (sub-channels) of programming already on the air. In fact, I watch the sub-channels more than the regular ones. No need to pay for satellite or cable. We are told that next year we could have over 80 channels (including subchannels) of programming to select from here in Central California. I'm getting networks I never heard of before with great programming. AND, I don't have a big screen HDTV. I watch a 20-inch analog tv and am getting the best reception ever. You're fortunate. Many areas outside of a city don't get DTV at all. Also, if you have a lot of subchannels, you're not getting HDTV, as it is an either/or situation. Subchannels mean that the bandwidth is not available for HD (anything over 720p) signals. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
On Jul 31, 1:16 am, "Brenda Ann" wrote:
You're fortunate. Many areas outside of a city don't get DTV at all. Also, if you have a lot of subchannels, you're not getting HDTV, as it is an either/or situation. Subchannels mean that the bandwidth is not available for HD (anything over 720p) signals. Like I said, I use an analog tv, so even the hdtv channels are not hd for me. But I can definitely tell a difference between the analog channels and the digital channels. The digital signal, even converted to analog, are a higher resolution than the analog channels. For those outside of a city where reception is a problem -- they will contine to get their LP translator stations for a few more years. Most of the major stations here have translator transmitters that relay their signal to the outlining areas. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
For some people who don't subscribe to satellite tv (I subscribe to
DirecTV, To much money for the amount of bread) or cable tv, there will be no tv at all for them.I think some of those people will be highly pizzed off too.It will not be an easy transition from Analog tv to HD tv.I predict there will be, Katrinas all over America, there will be Hell to pay! fed govt F..ks up again! Wearethegovtandweareheretohelpyou. cuhulin |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
On Jul 31, 4:15 pm, wrote:
For some people who don't subscribe to satellite tv (I subscribe to DirecTV, To much money for the amount of bread) or cable tv, there will be no tv at all for them.I think some of those people will be highly pizzed off too.It will not be an easy transition from Analog tv to HD tv.I predict there will be, Katrinas all over America, there will be Hell to pay! fed govt F..ks up again! Wearethegovtandweareheretohelpyou. cuhulin It's not going to be any surprise for anyone who watches over-the-air TV. Every channel here advertises the change all day and all night long. It is constantly going across the screen on a banner, they keep announcing it -- there is just no way these people don't know what is coming. I know people in their 80's and 90's who already have a digital tuner or converter box. Central California has the largest over-the-air population of anywhere in the US, and everyone I talk to is well aware of what is coming. Yes, it might require an outdoor antenna for some who now use an indoor antenna. We have 13 full-power stations here and 13 low-power stations. All 13 low-power stations will remain on the air for a few more years. I don't think it's going to be a big problem at all. You would have to live in a vacuum to not know what is coming. And there are people helping the elderly install their converter boxes. And more low power stations keep popping up. They will provide the service to those who don't want to make the conversion at this time. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
wrote in message ... On Jul 31, 4:15 pm, wrote: It's not going to be any surprise for anyone who watches over-the-air TV. Every channel here advertises the change all day and all night long. It is constantly going across the screen on a banner, they keep announcing it -- there is just no way these people don't know what is coming. I know people in their 80's and 90's who already have a digital tuner or converter box. Central California has the largest over-the-air population of anywhere in the US, and everyone I talk to is well aware of what is coming. Yes, it might require an outdoor antenna for some who now use an indoor antenna. For many, an outdoor antenna is not an option. Just try getting permission in a covenant community or an apartment complex to put up an antenna.. It will be interesting, for sure, to see what does happen next February. I suspect there will be a lot more than one might think that will be caught without. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
Brenda Ann wrote:
wrote in message ... On Jul 31, 4:15 pm, wrote: It's not going to be any surprise for anyone who watches over-the-air TV. Every channel here advertises the change all day and all night long. It is constantly going across the screen on a banner, they keep announcing it -- there is just no way these people don't know what is coming. I know people in their 80's and 90's who already have a digital tuner or converter box. Central California has the largest over-the-air population of anywhere in the US, and everyone I talk to is well aware of what is coming. Yes, it might require an outdoor antenna for some who now use an indoor antenna. For many, an outdoor antenna is not an option. Just try getting permission in a covenant community or an apartment complex to put up an antenna.. It will be interesting, for sure, to see what does happen next February. I suspect there will be a lot more than one might think that will be caught without. TV antennae are a protected species. FCC has ruled that no ordinances nor CC&R's may be enforced infringing the right to put up an antenna to receive OTA TV or small dish satellite. Locally, a very restrictive community tried to prevent the installation of an outdoor TV antenna. It took a couple of phone calls and a quote of the regulations to get the HOA off the back of the homeowner. There was another followup action to remove the newly installed antenna, but it stands today. Now three years and counting. FCC has been very clear about this...no one may prevent the installation of an outdoor antenna for TV reception. Digital or otherwise. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
D Peter Maus wrote:
FCC has been very clear about this...no one may prevent the installation of an outdoor antenna for TV reception. Digital or otherwise. I wonder why there haven't been stories of people in restricted condos putting up long wire antennas that, by pure coincidence, work better at receiving shortwave than they are getting TV signals? Better yet, TWO long wire antennas that could be explained away as merely huge rabbit ears. mike -- Due to the insane amount of spam and garbage, this filter blocks all postings with a Gmail, Google Mail, Google Groups or HOTMAIL address. It also filters everything from a .cn server. http://improve-usenet.org/ |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Brenda Ann wrote: wrote in message ... On Jul 31, 4:15 pm, wrote: It's not going to be any surprise for anyone who watches over-the-air TV. Every channel here advertises the change all day and all night long. It is constantly going across the screen on a banner, they keep announcing it -- there is just no way these people don't know what is coming. I know people in their 80's and 90's who already have a digital tuner or converter box. Central California has the largest over-the-air population of anywhere in the US, and everyone I talk to is well aware of what is coming. Yes, it might require an outdoor antenna for some who now use an indoor antenna. For many, an outdoor antenna is not an option. Just try getting permission in a covenant community or an apartment complex to put up an antenna.. It will be interesting, for sure, to see what does happen next February. I suspect there will be a lot more than one might think that will be caught without. TV antennae are a protected species. FCC has ruled that no ordinances nor CC&R's may be enforced infringing the right to put up an antenna to receive OTA TV or small dish satellite. Locally, a very restrictive community tried to prevent the installation of an outdoor TV antenna. It took a couple of phone calls and a quote of the regulations to get the HOA off the back of the homeowner. There was another followup action to remove the newly installed antenna, but it stands today. Now three years and counting. FCC has been very clear about this...no one may prevent the installation of an outdoor antenna for TV reception. Digital or otherwise. Many HOA's and apartment owners skirt that by stating that 'cable is available'. I know it stuck in Beaverton, OR. They started some years ago to restrict outdoor antennas, as soon as cable came to town. Eventually, I think they relented on 19" dishes, IF they could be disguised, but AFAIK, never on OTA antennas. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
m II wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote: FCC has been very clear about this...no one may prevent the installation of an outdoor antenna for TV reception. Digital or otherwise. I wonder why there haven't been stories of people in restricted condos putting up long wire antennas that, by pure coincidence, work better at receiving shortwave than they are getting TV signals? Better yet, TWO long wire antennas that could be explained away as merely huge rabbit ears. mike You're being absurd. FCC has also implied an extension of the Ham radio antenna exemption for other radio hobbycraft. And there have been instances where local CC&Rs have been overruled. I posted a link to the relevant rule here a few years ago. And used that very rule to shut down a couple of attempts to get my antennae pulled down. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
Brenda Ann wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Brenda Ann wrote: wrote in message ... On Jul 31, 4:15 pm, wrote: It's not going to be any surprise for anyone who watches over-the-air TV. Every channel here advertises the change all day and all night long. It is constantly going across the screen on a banner, they keep announcing it -- there is just no way these people don't know what is coming. I know people in their 80's and 90's who already have a digital tuner or converter box. Central California has the largest over-the-air population of anywhere in the US, and everyone I talk to is well aware of what is coming. Yes, it might require an outdoor antenna for some who now use an indoor antenna. For many, an outdoor antenna is not an option. Just try getting permission in a covenant community or an apartment complex to put up an antenna.. It will be interesting, for sure, to see what does happen next February. I suspect there will be a lot more than one might think that will be caught without. TV antennae are a protected species. FCC has ruled that no ordinances nor CC&R's may be enforced infringing the right to put up an antenna to receive OTA TV or small dish satellite. Locally, a very restrictive community tried to prevent the installation of an outdoor TV antenna. It took a couple of phone calls and a quote of the regulations to get the HOA off the back of the homeowner. There was another followup action to remove the newly installed antenna, but it stands today. Now three years and counting. FCC has been very clear about this...no one may prevent the installation of an outdoor antenna for TV reception. Digital or otherwise. Many HOA's and apartment owners skirt that by stating that 'cable is available'. And that's not relevant. FCC is quite clear. The right of an outdoor antenna for OTA may not be restricted. Even if alternatives are available. I know it stuck in Beaverton, OR. They started some years ago to restrict outdoor antennas, as soon as cable came to town. Eventually, I think they relented on 19" dishes, IF they could be disguised, but AFAIK, never on OTA antennas. If it stuck in Beaverton, there were other issues at play. Many HOA's, when faced with the loss of the 'cable' argument claim safety issues. Which then require inspections and individual rulings. And a lot of wasted time. And few homeowners have the time, nor the resources to fight an HOA which is well funded, and has lawyers on staff. But the fact remains OTA TV antennae are a protected species. FCC is clear on that. They're also clear that small dish antennae are also protected. Disguised or not. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
On Jul 31, 8:52*pm, m II wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote: * FCC has been very clear about this...no one may prevent the installation of an outdoor antenna for TV reception. Digital or otherwise. I wonder why there haven't been stories of people in restricted condos putting up long wire antennas that, by pure coincidence, work better at receiving shortwave than they are getting TV signals? - Better yet, TWO long wire antennas that could be - explained away as merely huge rabbit ears. - - mike BIG RABBIT EARS IS LISTENING ! we love you tv ~ RHF |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
On Jul 31, 9:07*pm, "Brenda Ann" wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in ... Brenda Ann wrote: wrote in message .... On Jul 31, 4:15 pm, wrote: It's not going to be any surprise for anyone who watches over-the-air TV. *Every channel here advertises the change all day and all night long. *It is constantly going across the screen on a banner, they keep announcing it -- there is just no way these people don't know what is coming. *I know people in their 80's and 90's who already have a digital tuner or converter box. *Central California has the largest over-the-air population of anywhere in the US, and everyone I talk to is well aware of what is coming. *Yes, it might require an outdoor antenna for some who now use an indoor antenna. For many, an outdoor antenna is not an option. Just try getting permission in a covenant community or an apartment complex to put up an antenna.. It will be interesting, for sure, to see what does happen next February. *I suspect there will be a lot more than one might think that will be caught without. * TV antennae are a protected species. FCC has ruled that no ordinances nor CC&R's may be enforced infringing the right to put up an antenna to receive OTA TV or small dish satellite. * Locally, a very restrictive community tried to prevent the installation of an outdoor TV antenna. It took a couple of phone calls and a quote of the regulations to get the HOA off the back of the homeowner. There was another followup action to remove the newly installed antenna, but it stands today. Now three years and counting. * FCC has been very clear about this...no one may prevent the installation of an outdoor antenna for TV reception. Digital or otherwise. - Many HOA's and apartment owners skirt that by stating - that 'cable is available'. *I know it stuck in Beaverton, OR. - They started some years ago to restrict outdoor antennas, - as soon as cable came to town. Eventually, I think they - relented on 19" dishes, IF they could be disguised, but - AFAIK, never on OTA antennas. 'available' does not meet the letter or the spirit of the Law. Alternative does -meaning- that the complex is 'wired' for a Community TV Antenna and/or Cable TV -and- that Service is included in the Building's HOA Fees. Apartment Buildings and Condo Conplexes can : If they want to meet this test. Subdivisions that are made-up of Individual Homes governed by a HOA or covered by a CC&R most of the time do not meet this test. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... If it stuck in Beaverton, there were other issues at play. Many HOA's, when faced with the loss of the 'cable' argument claim safety issues. Which then require inspections and individual rulings. And a lot of wasted time. And few homeowners have the time, nor the resources to fight an HOA which is well funded, and has lawyers on staff. But the fact remains OTA TV antennae are a protected species. FCC is clear on that. They're also clear that small dish antennae are also protected. Disguised or not. This may well be true, and I have no reason to doubt it. That being said, most people won't fight their HOA/apartment owner over the issue, figuring that they wouldn't be able to win, or, as you said, don't feel it worth their time and money to fight it. Who knows whether this will change next February or not. |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
On Aug 1, 2:02*am, m II wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote: * You're being absurd. ..well...hmpph..you're being quite humourless... Are you so bereft of fun that you have to mock even the most humble of postings? Has Republicanism taken ALL the joy out of your life? It's not too late to rejoin the human race, you know. mike -- Due to the insane amount of spam and garbage, this filter blocks all postings with a Gmail, Google Mail, Google Groups or HOTMAIL address. It also filters everything from a .cn server. http://improve-usenet.org/ Just curious Mike, but why do all your posts seem to have a 'tone' to them. Can't hurt a guy to ask. ;-) |
Homes in foreclosure and, yet, HDTV?
BCBlazysusan wrote:
On Aug 1, 2:02 am, m II wrote: D Peter Maus wrote: You're being absurd. ..well...hmpph..you're being quite humourless... Are you so bereft of fun that you have to mock even the most humble of postings? Has Republicanism taken ALL the joy out of your life? It's not too late to rejoin the human race, you know. Just curious Mike, but why do all your posts seem to have a 'tone' to them. Can't hurt a guy to ask. ;-) Each posting is individually and lovingly crafted to reflect the message it is sent in response to. In this particular case, I made a posting with an exaggerated premise, which I thought would be taken with a grain of salt. The words hyperbole and satire come to mind. Failing or refusing to see the humour in the posting, Peter, in an ill mannered, rude, unreasoned, borderline evil and yes, clearly antisocial manner, calls it absurd. That really hurt. After I wiped the tears from my eyes with the hand knitted pink handkerchief that dxAce sent me, I overcame my grief and posted the message which brought us to this stage. Now, I know for a fact that Peter is a good human being. He is just seeing rough times now. Many decent, God fearing people fall to the temptations of evil. In his case, unlike others here, it isn't alcoholism. No, it's purely a disease of the mind. Many people have been infected by the same sickness. The disease, a mutant strain of Republicanism, has the ability to kill any vestiges of humanity and happiness within the victim. Everyone becomes your enemy. There IS an answer, though. We turn our eyes to the Heavens. Let us pray. mike -- Due to the insane amount of spam and garbage, this filter blocks all postings with a Gmail, Google Mail, Google Groups or HOTMAIL address. It also filters everything from a .cn server. http://improve-usenet.org/ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:10 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com