TV3's Transmission Network?

Elmo

Can anyone tell me about TV3's Transmission Network.

TV3 refer to it alot but I assumed that TV3 pay RTE for its terrestiral transmissions. I know RTE get 2million from TV3 for Transmission costs.

Anyone know anything more about the TV3 Transmission Network.

Ulsterman 1690

I assumed that TV3 pay RTE for its terrestiral transmissions

You assumed correctly

rlogue

Surely the BCI should be forcing TV3 to provide Free national coverage? Oh wait, this is the BCI we're talking about... :rolleyes

Elmo

If you go to TV3's FAQ you will see that one of the questions refers to TV3's Transmission Network. And in the Sunday Business Post their CEO spoke of how they wanted to expand their transmission network.

www.tv3.ie

Ulsterman 1690

Hardly much point expanding an analouge network at this stage.

watty

Considering it could be 5 years or more before the 20% that don't get TV3, get Digital, maybe it is worthwhile.

Even if there is a Digital Roll out (and there is STILL no realistic plan), those 20% will get Digital last.

Elmo

Hardly much point expanding an analouge network at this stage.

According to TV3 when they first started all they needed to do was flick a switch for the digital change over.

Anyway I am still looking for this so call network.

from TV3.ie

We are aware of reception difficulties in some parts of east and west Cork, western fringes of Kerry, Connemara, western Mayo and some parts of Donegal. The TV3 transmission network has been built from scratch over the last three years, and it currently covers more than 90% of the population. Unlike the RTE network this network is entirely funded by TV3, with no use of public money.

We very much wish to extend our coverage to as many viewers as possible and fully intend to do so when financially viable.

It is our intention to broadcast on the new Digital Terrestrial Transmission network, which is expected over the next few years replace the analogue networks currently in use by TV3, TG4 and RTE.

The enabling legislation was placed before the Dail last year, but has only just been adopted due to a number of outstanding issues which still remain to be resolved, not least the proper role of RTE in the commercial marketplace. This transmission network will serve areas not currently covered by the existing analogue network.

TV3 will be pressing for Digital Terrestrial services to be made available first to those areas not currently served, or partially served, by the existing network. The Digital rollout should be focused on the least served, followed by the best.

POOR OLD TV3

They didn't even apply to be involved in the testing of DTT.

Ulsterman 1690

watty wrote:

Considering it could be 5 years or more before the 20% that don't get TV3, get Digital, maybe it is worthwhile.

Hardly worth anyones while investing in a transmission network which will be obsolete in five years time (and OUGHT to be obsolete today)

L1011

Hasn't been publically funded... except for the physical towers, backup generators, microwave links, etc that they rent off RTE...

Elmo

Rang TV3 today, they do not have a national network, they rent the RTE network. Why do they talk about it so?

watty

A major part of the cost for DTT is the distribution and masts.
RTE have been quietly upgrading their distribution network to digital. Many sites are now fed with digital fibre, not analogue rebroadcast or analogue microwave. In some cases they have fitted digital Microwave where fibre was not practical.
Some newer transmitters are able to handle digital (DTT ironically needs higher performance analogue linearity on the power amplifiers and mixers etc of transmitters as "digital" signals are a special kind of analogue encoding (OFDM with QAM).

The masts are mostly there too. Some additional fill in transmitters needed.

They have been replaciing "off air rebroadcast" feed repeaters (RTE call them transposers?) with digital fibre or microwave feeds because DTT can't easly use "repeaters" especially on a nice SFN system.

So I suspect that the cost of DTT rollout is much less than it was in 2001, but that no doubt the costings to get a budget from Government may be done assuming there is no DTT transmission network.

Basically I suspect at many sites now they only need to convert the MPEG2 TS to OFDM instead of decode to analogue. Of course any MPEG4, can be actually carried in the mulplexed single MPEG2 TS on the fibre/uWave link.

The current MPEG2 bitrate (to feed the analogue decoders on transmitters) is about twice what is used on Sky.

Indeed TV3's coverage "problem" is simply money. RTE has the 4th TX on all the TG4 sites and TV3 won't pay for the last 20% of distribution and transmission. Nothing was spent by TV3 of their own or Government money for "their network" as it all existed before TV3 was even created, from when TG4 was rolled out.

Elmo

Nothing was spent by TV3 of their own or Government money for "their network" as it all existed before TV3 was even created, from when TG4 was rolled out.

So if TV3 had appeared back in 1989 they would have had to roll out a network of their own?

Does TG4 own the part of the network which RTE set up for them?

L1011

TG4 rent capacity on the RTÉ Network Transmission Limited network, as do TV3, and anyone else who wants it (radio stations, private operators, mobile networks, industry, the ESB, health boards, wireless BB providers, etc, etc)

icdg

TV3 don't have a network of their own - they (like all other national broadcasters) pay RTÉ NL (RTÉ Transmission Network Limited) to broadcast their programmes. The company's a wholly owned subsidary of RTÉ though is supposedly rink-fenced.

http://www.rtenl.ie/aboutus.htm

watty

Elmo wrote:

So if TV3 had appeared back in 1989 they would have had to roll out a network of their own?

Probably they would not have "rolled out" till RTE was doing the upgrades for TG4.

If the "3rd" channel had needed to do their own network, it would never have launched. In the UK most sites had a 4th transmitter when UHF BBC1 & ITV was rolled out with BBC2. "Five" was the problem as the sites did not have a 5th transmitter and the bandplan assumed only 4 analogue channels ever. "Five" was supposed to be Digital only, but "Digital" hadn't arrived. The lack of terrestrial coverage (about 80% only, or less at the start) was why "five" was on Analogue Satellite.

BirdXX

Someone mentioned here that TV3 pay for their transmission provided by RTE (€2m?). That network was built with your money and mine, the licence fee. So TV3 have to pay out of their own revenues, which don't cost me a cent?Don't see a problem there.

Also, I can get TV3 on the DTT trial, and I read somewhere that they are actually running the HD trial channel, with content from the other broadcasters as well as their own. Sound like involvement to me, and again doesn't cost me a cent.

Now, if they live up to the promises the new owners have made recently about more Irish programming that will really be something - and once again it won't cost me a cent - or am I missing something?

Elmo

Someone mentioned here that TV3 pay for their transmission provided by RTE (€2m?). That network was built with your money and mine, the licence fee. So TV3 have to pay out of their own revenues, which don't cost me a cent?Don't see a problem there.

TV3 are paying for the RTE network that was built with your money over the course of 40 years, I am sure the network is worth more then 2million a year.

TV3 are a one trick pony, I would worry that if TV3 lost corronation street and emmerdale that the price DH paid for the service is greatly over valued.

TV3 haven't invested any money into any network, they pay rent to RTE. (or an audience for that matter, i.e. Programming that they control) They state that they would like to see DTT rolled out in areas where analogue is not strong first, yet they didn't even apply to be Managers of the Trails (unlike Channel 6 & Setanta).

Now, if they live up to the promises the new owners have made recently about more Irish programming that will really be something - and once again it won't cost me a cent - or am I missing something?

The majority of which will be co-funded by the BCI's sound and vision fund which is provided to the BCI by the Licence Fee. Ben Frow will have 2,000,000 to spend on orginal programming outside of News, Information & Sport.

And he stated that he wouldn't have had the courage to swap the 6:30 news with Expose. that's a scary statement from the new director of programming and he also has said he doesn't want huge changes to occur. He states that a 10 year old station has already become unfashionable, all of this doesn't sound good to me.

It's not that it doesn't cost you a cent but we should be critical of TV3 just as much as RTE, TV3 is a NATIONAL BROADCASTER. (Earning 52,000,000 a year).

Also TV3 are stating they have a Network, which they don't.

Ulsterman 1690

What does it matter a damn if TV3 own their own network or rent it off anyone else ? Lots of TV channels dont own their own networks even the BBC dont own their own network anymore. I can think of plenty of reasons to have a go at TV3 but the fact that they hire a network from RTE isint one of them.

Incidently there are lots of sound technical, enviornmental and economic reasons why TV broadcasters should share (or at the very least co-site) their transmission infrastructure.

And for the record it was initially planned (1989) that TV3 would be transmitted solely via MMDS but the stupidity of this concept was very quickly realised and from then on (1990) it was decided that it would hire transmission facilities off RTE. By then the precedent had already been set both in the UK (where BBC and ITV have been sharing sites since the 1960's) and Ireland (where several commercial radio stations were using RTE facilities from 1989 onwards) of course TV3 didnt get up and running until 1998 but there were other reasons for this (some TV3's fault most of them down to the incompetence of the government and regulatory bodies)

Elmo

What does it matter a damn if TV3 own their own network or rent it off anyone else ?

I amn't being critical of TV3 in relation to the network they use, I just think it is strange that the CEO of the channel would suggest that he wants to develope the network and that the site suggest that they have a network which isn't funded by public moneys both of which are false.

I just think it is bizzare that TV3 would make statements like this.

Ulsterman 1690

How is TV3's network "funded by public money" ? It would only be funded by public money if RTE were renting it to them at a loss.

By "developing the network" I presume they mean paying RTE more money in order to develop the network on their behalf

Elmo

By "developing the network" I presume they mean paying RTE more money in order to develop the network on their behalf

I think its just a bull**** thing to say. I mean if RTE sold the network then it wouldn't be publicly funded and the TV3 couldn't give out about RTENL as they do on their site.

I cann't see TV3 wanting to pay RTE any more money.

icdg

Ulsterman 1690 wrote:

What does it matter a damn if TV3 own their own network or rent it off anyone else ? Lots of TV channels dont own their own networks even the BBC dont own their own network anymore. I can think of plenty of reasons to have a go at TV3 but the fact that they hire a network from RTE isint one of them.

Incidently there are lots of sound technical, enviornmental and economic reasons why TV broadcasters should share (or at the very least co-site) their transmission infrastructure.

And for the record it was initially planned (1989) that TV3 would be transmitted solely via MMDS but the stupidity of this concept was very quickly realised and from then on (1990) it was decided that it would hire transmission facilities off RTE. By then the precedent had already been set both in the UK (where BBC and ITV have been sharing sites since the 1960's) and Ireland (where several commercial radio stations were using RTE facilities from 1989 onwards) of course TV3 didnt get up and running until 1998 but there were other reasons for this (some TV3's fault most of them down to the incompetence of the government and regulatory bodies)

Actually, the primary reason it took TV3 so long to go on air was obtaining funding, firstly from UTV, then following UTV's withdrawal, from CanWest Global. The IRTC's withdrawal of the contract, of course, didn't help matters, but from the IRTC's point of view, it looked at that stage like TV3 were never going to go on air at the slow rate they were progressing, it made sense to readvertise if the contract wasn't going to be used.

L1011

"developing their network" would be paying RTE for access to the 90-odd transmitters they are currently NOT on that RTE and TG4 are carried on.

BirdXX

Crikey Elmo, looks like I trod on a few corns here. I'm a noobie so forgive a certain naivety, but what did TV3 ever do to you? They certainly haven't taken any of your money...

I'll take a step back now and lurk some more!

byte

As a newbie, you wouldn't be familiar with Elmo's dislike of TV3.

I think he secretly loves the channel, and is in denial

Elmo

Crikey Elmo, looks like I trod on a few corns here. I'm a noobie so forgive a certain naivety, but what did TV3 ever do to you? They certainly haven't taken any of your money...

Welcome to my anti-TV3 rants. They have been with us 10 years, and have had a huge oppurtunity.

Actually they will receive 1.5million for several of their shows from the Licence Fee.

TV3 are a dreadful channel that don't deserve to have a licence. There are plenty of shows they could produce in Ireland but all they have done is to show the same stuff RTE where showing 10 years ago. (Trust me I have issues with RTE too, but then so does everyone).

I think he secretly loves the channel, and is in denial

Ireland AM and the Best of Ireland AM on VHS since 20/09/1999

rlogue

Well, I'm with Elmo on the TV3 bashing! TV3 *should* have been compelled by the BCI/IRTC to be on all analogue transmitters in the Republic, but due to weakness on the regulator's part they weren't. 10 years have almost passed since they launched and not one other transmitter or transposer has been added to the TV3 "network". I could understand if they were to phase in further analogue rollout over a number of years, but the fact remains that since the launch TV3 have not added a single analogue transmitter to their service. This leaves large portions of rural Ireland without a TV3 service at all unless they PAY Sky to subscribe.

Meanwhile TV3's statement that they want to push digital rollout where they (TV3) have CHOSEN not to transmit is pure bollox. It is patently obvious that digital rollout will start on the remaining main transmitters before any transposer gets a look in.

As to TV3's Irish content, the fault for the near lack of original programming on the station must lie with the regulator for not insisting on a reasonable proportion of original content in prime time. TV3 regularly get away with the existing quota by bulking up on Ireland AM, The "Best" of Ireland AM and news and sports bulletins. I'm quite satisfied that TV3's news and current affairs output is adequate but it is a complete scandal that the BCI have never had the balls to insist that TV3 became a genuine Irish alternative to RTÉ. A poor copy of ITV1 is not what this country needs!

watty

The only "network developing" TV3 need to do is pay to be on the rest of it. It is already there and my friends in RTENL, being techies can't figure why they aren't on it.

Yep anyone with a dish can get the real ITV free. TV3 needs to be more Irish orientated or what is the point?