Collaborate on Spectrum Bill Sample for Planning with Ease Using airSlate SignNow

Spectrum bill sample for Planning

good morning everybody and uh well we've talked about all these wonderful things that we're going to be able to do with broadcasting I I'm afraid I may be the bear with a little bit of the bad news part of things so uh but hopefully we'll get through this but I'm going to try to cover a lot of a lot of things here real quick uh and if you have any questions hopefully we'll have a little time for that uh basically what I'm going to talk about is the situation in uh in the U.S with respect to Spectrum and particularly television Spectrum there's other Spectrum issues in the U.S but our Focus here is broadcasting and both the television okay uh back in 2009 the United States Congress asked the Federal Communications Commission the FCC to come up with a plan for Broadband for the country so the FCC spent about a year coming up with this and they delivered a report to Congress called connecting America the national Broadband plan okay in this plan what they said that there was need for expanded Broadband it was critical to the country's future um they came up with a whole lot of excellent uses uh things like more efficient business Commerce operation improved education improved Health Care better Management on and on and on lots of lots of wonderful things you can do if you have all this uh the plan touched on wired connections although an awful lot of what they talked about of all these wonderful things would have probably been better done with wired connections the whole Focus was Wireless and what they said that was needed was that they needed 500 megahertz of new Spectrum within 10 years and they needed 300 megahertz of new Spectrum for Broadband within five years and it needed to come from Spectrum in the range somewhere between 225 megahertz and 3.7 gigahertz so where was this going to come from well so it was going to come from some of the existing bands that where things weren't being used but the biggest chunk of this 300 megahertz that they wanted in five years was going to come out of the UHF broadcast band it's 41 of the band okay so how do they come up with this idea that they needed all this well they extrapolated from the recent growth in Wireless uh now I'm not sure that that was the best way to do this but this is how they were trying to do uh justify this my feeling is that you know everybody that had one of the cell phone has one and to expand further in data services and everything I'm not sure people could afford the data plans but anyway they decided this is what they needed and the reason for taking the broadcast back from this is that they said well the spectrum's worth more for wireless than it is for Broadcasting and they said broadcasting was inefficient use of the Spectrum which I think a lot of us might beg to disagree on that anyway so how they were going to get this they talked about maybe revising the interference protection requirements means you can put stations closer together uh stations since you have digital now stations maybe you could share a channel run two programs streams in one in one channel uh unfortunately there's already a lot of stations that are already doing that now so to share they'd have to give up something um they also talked about possibly using things like single frequency networks and auctioning Spectrum in other words basically give broadcasters money to go away uh they also talked about doing maybe just a simple repack of the existing band to try and rearrange stations and come up with more spectrum that way Unfortunately they did that that didn't gain them anything they got one channel out of it so that didn't help and then there was also talk of things like Spectrum fees well you know if we can't get you to go away anyway any other way we'll price you out of business all right let's back up a little bit a little bit of Television Spectrum history in the U.S back in 1938 we had 19 channels authorized now nobody was really doing anything but those were the channels move forward in 1940. we were down to 18 channels uh part of it went a lower end went away it went to FM 1946 that was back again but we took moved FM someplace else we have down to 13 channels 1948 we lost Channel One we've got third we are now only have 12 channels so after World War II uh there was more demand for spectrum for broadcasting so the initial response was to try and reduce the spacings and that resulted in a whole lot of interference decided that wasn't a good idea so in 1952 they added UHF to the television spectrum and added and these were channels 14 to 83. with channel 37 was reserved you could not be used for broadcasting was reserved for radio astronomy then we started digesting this in 1970 they took away channels 70 to 83 and reallocated that to land mobile also in 1970 they took channels 14 to 20 and gave those to land mobile in the 10 largest settings and in 1974 they added three additional cities theirs was the original uh cities although two of them Cleveland and Detroit were never really used for land mobile because they could never get an agreement with Canada on that because they're along the border and these were the additional cities they added broadcasting could not operate co-channel within 250 kilometers of those cities and 176 kilometers on the first adjacent Channel so anyways here's a little recap of sort of where we were then in 1953 there was 486 megahertz available by 1970 we had lost 84 megahertz of that plus in addition to that the 11 cities were being used large cities being used where it's been used for land mobile so then we started planning for Digital television in the early 1990s and so we had to have a way of transitioning from analog to digital so we had to put it give decided that would you had to give each of their approximately 16 to 1700 full power television stations an additional Channel and so we had to put those into the existing band but we still had you know the same restrictions uh in addition there were uh there's about 6 000 what we call low power television stations and translators uh those were ignored in the digital planning they were not given second channels and some of them were even displaced by by the digital so we shared for a while digital analog uh each of those stations had each of those analog stations had a visual Channel uh it essentially replicated the analog service area although some of the stations that were analog at low VHF you weren't they had a UHF Channel they were not able to replicate it just took too much power an interference was a compromise there was more interference especially to analog but there was also interference into the digital which believed they could tolerate during the transition so anyway we finally transitioned to fully digital for all the full power stations uh just a few years back and we shrank the band again another 108 megahertz one away and so now we're down to channels 2 to 51. uh the stations had a choice for if they were within the 2-51 range they could pick either their analog or digital channel for final operation and the service Contours were comparable to what they had had for analog part of the problem was is that some of those compromises especially on interference that occurred during the transition didn't go away they became permanent so where are we today okay we've got 49 channels 294 megahertz of spectrum we still have these major cities where we've got channels that are being shared with land mobile that are not available we have approximately 1800 full power TV stations full power TV stations in the U.S at least we have three operating three bands low and high VHF and then a UHF and the UHF stations uh could have powers up to a megawatt and we have a good number of them that are running a megawatt and most of them are you know the ones that are less than that are probably maybe half a megawatt so they're they're high power we also have again about 6 000 low-powered TV stations and translators uh and UHF their maximum power is 15 kilowatts so these are all sort of substantial size facilities um so we've lost 192 megahertz since 1953 now you also take into consideration that low VHF just doesn't work very well with digital there's just way too much noise there so if you take that away you've really lost about over 50 percent of your spectrum so back to the Broadband plan again we've got 90 294 megahertz of spectrum all together Broadband wants to take away 120 megahertz of that we got a problem so we did a preliminary assessment of this and what would happen is if the existing stations were still to maintain programming how what would what would happen and here's what happens if you look at this map of the United States these are TV markets the ones in blue would require at least some of the stations in the market to share a channel the markets that are in red would require at least every station in the market to share a Channel with another station and in some cases there would be more than two to one sharing someone would have to say three stages would have to share a channel so it's uh it's not a pretty picture all right now so they had this Broadband plan so so how do they implement this well we they came up there was an act of Congress the official title is the middle class tax relief and job creation Act of 2012. now in the United States we like to take things and we come up with an act of Congress and we left a whole bunch of things into one thing part of that was title VI subpart D which has now become called the Spectrum Act and so what that did it authorized the FCC to conduct broadcast Spectrum options now there was to be what was called reverse auction and then a forward auction the reverse auction is is it the broadcasters could come in if they wanted to give up their spectrum they could propose a price they could bid put in a bed and since this for this much money I'll go away uh the forward auction of course is just a normal auction once they get to Spectrum back they'll auction it off or you know broad some type of broadband use now one of the important parts of this thing though was is that the Congress said it had to be voluntary on the part of the broadcasters if you don't want to participate you don't have to and they offered three options for participation you could completely give up your channel and just go away and be compensated for it you could give up a UHF Channel and say you were willing to go to High VHF and operate there or you could give up your channel in exchange for sharing a Channel with somebody else and those were the three options for participation in the auction okay those that were eligible to participate in the auction were the full service stations and what's called Class A stations these are low power TV stations that have been granted primary status they can't be displaced they're basically treated the same as as a full power station and they were allowed they're allowed to participate in the auction stations that agreed to share a Channel or change channels would maintain their Carriage rights this is mainly with cable in the U.S the cable companies are required to carry the local stations and there's different ways you can do the company if the cable company doesn't really want it doesn't want to pay you for it it doesn't they don't have to pay if you just come in and say I want you to carry it now the broadcaster has the option of saying all right if you want to if you want me on your cable system you have to pay me so much a month and so a lot of the broadcasters actually would drive a considerable amount of Revenue just from Cable cable carriage uh also the stations that would remain after the the uh the auction the fact that we're going to have to try and get contiguous blocks of spectrum preferably at the upper end of the UHF band means that some of the stations that would remain would have to be relocated they could not be forced to change bands if they had didn't participate in the auction and they staying if if they're going to be if they're a UHF station they have to have another UHF Channel the relocation expenses will be covered out of proceeds from the auction though there was an upper limit put on that but the auction has to generate enough money to cover that in addition the auction is supposed to show a profit of which would go in the proceeds of which would go to build out more Public Safety Communications infrastructure okay so we need uh contiguous blocks of spectrum as I said before that means you're going to have to repack and the repacking was supposed to be done based on a computer methodology which the FCC uses now when they're uh making we're making changes they've proposed proposed changes are analyzed using a methodology which is described in a document called the FCC bullet in oat 69 we'll talk a little bit more about that now the Act Congress also said that the commission had to make all reasonable efforts to preserve the coverage area and population served of these stations that were either changing Channel or did not participate in the auction this is where the the bulletin 69 comes in or we refer we just refer to it as oet 69. it's actually a document although the software uh really there's a lot more in the software that is in that document and I know because I wrote the software uh anyway what it does it predicts coverage and interference the core of it is the lonely rise train dependent propagation model uh it establishes Contour boundaries for each station and then it breaks that area within that boundary down into grid cells and then analyzes whether or not there's predictive service and and or interference at each of those good cells so anyway the FCC had to implement this you know it was trying to implement this thing so the way the commission goes about implementing something like this is they do have what they call a notice of proposed rule making and what this is the commission lays out what it is they plan to do sometimes they lay out options we could do this or we could do this and then they request comments on that and then there's also something called reply comments where people can reply to whatever the other people commented on or they can reply to their own comments if they like if they want to throw something else in and that was adopted last last fall in September so there's a whole lot of issues that were raised in this and I'll sort of quickly go through some of them the goal of course is to get these contiguous blocks of spectrum to take an auction off uh now of course the participants in the auction are likely to be all over the band so as I said before you're going to repacking is going to be required if stations decide they don't want to participate and have to get moved depending upon the repacking scheme which is going to have to get paid for how that repacking gets done affects the cost of it so they've got to weigh that in analyzing the bids and all of that they also have to do this service replication both the area and the population now these terms coverage area and population serve that are that were mentioned in the act aren't defined in the ACT nor are they defined in oet 69 so that here's what the FCC proposed and this this first one is probably not controversial decided that the coverage area for full service station would be the area inside its noise limited contour and this is just limited just by noise you know as long as signals above the new noise threshold that's where the Contour is for class A stations theirs is inside what they're called their protected Contour which is a little higher level than the noise protected Contour and then the other one was the population served and uh what they decided on this was that it would be the population inside that Contour that's not affected by interference and also has INF level to have have service the Contour is defined just using a set of Curves and the height above average terrain between 2 and 10 miles that once that's established this we go to this lonely rice propagation model which looks at all the cells in there and they may or may not have service based upon that because that looks at the terrain path the entire terrain path between the transmitter and the receive point so even though it's inside that Contour that was initially established it might not be predicted to have surface okay they um this replication thing now when you change channels uh due to the frequency changes the same antenna doesn't produce necessarily the same the same service uh especially when you take take into consideration this Longley rice model which is also not only trade depend but it is also frequency dependent so the FCC has software that will Design basically an antenna which will actually replicate exactly what you have now the problem is is that the antenna may not be practical to build so there's a couple of options with that this the commission said well we will let you use your uh your current antenna you adjust your power so that the total area inside the Contour equals the same total area have now now this may mean that the Contour may be further out some places closer in than others but as long as you have the same area inside that thing that's okay they would also let you use a different antenna pattern provided that it did not go outside of what the replication pattern would give you at least that's what they're proposing anyway um now some of the problems that we run into with this is that when you start changing channels uh you start having a problem with who you're serving because with the different propagation uh the you know change with the different frequencies some of the service was big populations being served may not be served now you also are moving stations around so you may have the same amount of interference you had before but it may be a different place and so those are those are things that have to be have to be considered as the weather in deter whether that's acceptable or not uh the secs also decide that well we think that maybe we're going to allow more new interference now right now the current limit if a station wants to make a change in their facility they cannot cause more than half a percent new interference to any other station and this but there's also a baseline that's been a baseline facility on which that was based and what's happened is is that a lot of these stations have already increased powers and things and they've eaten up this half percent already well the commission was basically ignore that and say all right we're going to allow now another additional up to two percent interference uh so why are they going to do that or of course it makes it easier to get the spectrum they want another thing too is that they supported a cut-off date of what facility would be protected if if you had a construction permit permit uh as of the date of the act or a licensed facility that would be protected anything that was granted after that all that facility will not be protected if it's different of a different service and uh I won't get into it but there's some unfairness about that about things that have gotten held up and shouldn't have been so but I won't get into that so there's there's a couple of ways that you could go about maintaining the uh the population served you can just do it on Raw population and say okay if I'm serving a million people now at the end of the day wherever I land I still got to be serving a million people might not be the same million people or you could look at this on a sell-by-sale basis which would basically be true replication where you look at each cell and says well this one has service that has to have service after after a change uh the easiest one to do of course is just the raw population and that's what the that's what the FCC wants to do but it does run the risk of having viewers that no longer have service might get some new people but some you lost uh of course the sell by sell thing is more difficult to do it gets you the best result as far as replication but it also May reduce the amount of spectrum that you're able to get back because of the constraints of it um they also proposed some other things for auction participation there are they ask whether or not that they should allow stations to move from UHF to low VHF one of the options was that you can say that I'm willing to move to high VHF but they didn't mention low they want to give you that option also just an option just accept more interference from other TV stations or from broadband or reduce your power and agree to a smaller service area now the first part of the problem with this is that they basically all reduce service and is that really acceptable this has not been the fcc's policy in the past if you wanted to change your facility and you were going to say significantly reduce power or remove your transmitter site significantly they took a long hard look at this is to see who was going to lose service and if they thought that there was too much service being lost they wouldn't Grant it now they're saying okay well maybe that's all right now we've changed our mind uh there's some other other issues what about channel 37 which has been reserved for radio astronomy and it's also used by Magic for medical Telemetry in a lot of places the radio astronomy is a receive only thing and they're they're listening to all sorts of things signals you know coming in from from space and they use it for a whole lot of different purposes things like you know predicting earthquakes and you know Continental shifts and all this sort of thing that they use some of this data for uh there's a concern that you know well can they use some other frequencies and they actually do use some other frequencies but is there something unique to channel 37 that they couldn't go to another Channel and have the same same result and they have facilities are built specifically for that channel which would of course have to be rebuilt if they move someplace else the medical Telemetry is another thing it's used in areas where where you don't basically have adjacent Channel TV stations that interfere with it would interfere with it or in those areas if it does it's very limited amount of the band of that channel that they're able to use and there's also a discussion in the ACT about relocating these things if it can be done for a certain dollar amount now there's a question about whether or not there's so many of these things out there that they may be able to relocate it for that so there anyway there's a lot of problems with with you know using the channel 37 and it looks like at the moment the FCC sort of appears to be leaning to just leave it alone and we'll work around that uh there's also a lot of concerns about the band plan for the new Broadband man um of course the there's a discussion of talking about having both the reverse auction and the forward auctions at the same time well this is a problem because they really don't know how much Spectrum they're going to have to auction off so uh and you're not going to know that until you get to reverse the reverse auction completed so so that that's a complication uh the FCC has proposed for the Broadband for that band that there would be a uniform Nationwide downlink block of frequencies the Uplink frequencies in other words from the cell phone or whatever device back might be variable depending upon how much spectrum they would have in different parts of the country because they've come to the conclusion that they're likely not to get the same amount of spectrum everywhere because there's some places now where there's already a spectrum available less densely populated areas of the country there's already Spectrum there and they might have stations in those areas who aren't making any money decide maybe I will go after painting so they know that there's going to be a you know probably a variable amount of spectrum available but they're going to deal with that on the Uplink yet uh the plans that they've put out there the band plans is sort of a mixture mixing television and broadband television Broadband more television more broadband well most of the wireless carriers look at this and the broadcasters looked at this they said what were you thinking we probably should stay away from each other as much as possible so let's not have all these edges we have to worry about the FCC still thinks there's there's a rationale behind that so there's a big discussion about that I was just at a panel last week where that was being discussed and uh so we'll have to see how that plays out but that that creates additional problems because then you have to worry about protecting each other at the edges of these bands that requires larger guard bands in between to avoid interference and that becomes wasteful of spectrum so also this potential that you're not going to have the same Spectrum available throughout the country you're going to have the situation where you have broadband and television sharing channels now you can separate them good ways apart and this works until you have ducting and then maybe for several hours it only cares it occurs every now and then but for several hours all of a sudden these things that were spaced far enough apart aren't space far enough apart anymore so you've got this high powered television station facility out there if that Signal's booming in hundreds of miles away wiping out all your broadband service maybe for two or three hours you know and it doesn't happen very often but it's going to happen it happens now we've had with the the sharing that we have now with the channels 14 to 20. this happens every now and then you know that all of a sudden and a lot of that's used for Public Safety and they start screaming that they're getting wiped out with this TV station this is hundreds of miles away from them so it happens occasionally and we've already got this problem because they've already auctioned off television channel 52 and you have wireless carriers there and we're having problems interference between them and the TV stations and just both directions uh that they have a problem with high power on from the TV on channel 51 you also have a problem when the handset gets really close to the TV receiver now it's putting in a whole lot more power to that and receive antenna than the television station is so uh so we already have that problem uh and as I said you know you've got different real power disparities you know the the Broadband base stations you know tend to be kilowatt or less the the consumer equipment the cell phones typically are two tenths of a lot or less uh for power TV stations at a megawatt or 15 kilowatts for class A's you know these things just don't mix very well an experience tells us that there's you know can be big problems if you don't do this right uh anyway so I'll just sort of sum up here really quick uh the television broadcasting has already lost a lot of spectrum over the years it looks like we may aligned up losing more which is going to pose problems for us we're going to have to figure out how to do at least the same as what we're doing with less Spectrum we've got these band plans that are going to cause problems you know and we did but we just don't know at this point because as I said this is a rule making from the FCC the rules are not out yet now they have said that they would they will finalize this by the end of the year now that might not be the end of it yeah though because the way this usually works is the FCC will finalize something somebody doesn't like it and they'll file a petition for reconsideration which the FCC then has to consider that and they can just consider it deny it and give her you know whatever reason they like and sometimes it doesn't end there because then they deny it and these party if they're they think they're being you know treated unfairly well then they will take it to court and they fight a battle there so this isn't you know this may not get finalized this year as to what's going to happen now will any of this really happen uh I mean the rules and all that will happen but will they actually get enough broadcasters to participate in this to get enough Spectrum back to make it worthwhile doing it and my feeling is probably not they will they will get they may get a lot of broadcasters to participate but the price tag they will put on their Spectrum probably will be too high they will get Spectrum in the small markets in the areas where there's not a lot of population they'll get some participation there that's not where they want spectrum they want Spectrum in the top 10 to 20 TV markets and those are places I just don't think they're going to get much participation or at least at a price level that they can afford so we'll have to see where this goes I mean that won't be the end of it either because they'll figure out some new scheme to try and try and get Spectrum so anyway uh that kind of wraps it up if anybody has any questions you have to try and answer them thank you back there a parallel story from the site of the cellular operations on the broadcast site right is avoided he is successful as the FCC thing what do you think the options industry are well I I think that in the end I think there's going to have to be some cooperation between the industries uh what's sort of interesting has come out of this is is that these Wireless carriers who are looking to get this spectrum don't necessarily want to use it the way the FCC thinks they want to use it what they really want to do is get into Broadcasting I mean one of the one of the major carriers Verizon in the U.S has publicly said that that's what they want to do is do Broadcasting so you have to think about this does this make any sense to take Spectrum away from somebody who's doing broadcasting and give it to somebody else to do broadcasting with it just with a different methodology does that make any sense you know so I'm just not really sure you know this whole thing hasn't didn't get thought through really well you know my feeling is is that and I think Verizon's right that that's you know this is the way they would make money because I don't think that they can make money with just more you know Wireless Spectrum you know the the data plans are expensive I mean it costs money it costs a lot of money to build build an infrastructure for this they've got to buy the Spectrum at auction then they have to build a huge infrastructure to support all this who's going to pay for service so they can have you know a one-to-one connection so they can do video on demand people can't afford that they you know the pr and again the carriers can't make it cheaper because it cost them too much to build it so I think there's going to have to be a lot of cooperation here and a lot of rethinking on all of this I don't know that they've really I there's there's a you know it's a big number well they think there's got a really big number what number they're really you know gonna would get for it probably will be a lot less I mean I I talked to someone a year or so ago about this and he didn't and it's fairly knowledgeable about the industry and he did not think that they would get anywhere near the amount of money they think they're going to get because he believes that the carriers already are sitting on spectrum that they've bought at previous auctions that they haven't built out yet and their stockholders are not likely to allow them to spend a lot more money to buy more Spectrum unless they can get it really cheap interactivity is becoming more important for broadcasters so our broadcasters in America are interested in running their own wireless networks converting them broadcast networks to one Networks the answer is yes the well the the ones that really understand where the future is yes I mean the future is not to the television to the home anymore in the U.S it's to portable mobile devices that's the future uh the homes are being served mainly by cable now and you know and then a smaller percentage much smaller percentage of satellite service but that you know that market even if you look at the you know depending on whose numbers you look at it's somewhere maybe under 10 percent to the best maybe 20 percent of the homes are are viewing off air at least on one set or something but you know the future is is to you know iPads and cell phones and that sort of thing and that's where the broadcasters at least the ones that are you know knowledgeable and Forward Thinking are looking that uh I mean there's already discussions about a new television you know modulation scheme uh in the U.S the atsc 3.0 which is not going to be a Backward Compatible system what is looking towards that we also have the more the international fob TV initiative which is looking in sort of a worldwide standard to do the very to do the same thing so that that's where the future is yeah and and as part of that is a is a back Channel so that they can so then this this way they can really they really know what people are watching because this is very important in the U.S where it's advertisers supported and so they're advertising Revenue depends upon how many people are watching so if they can get this back Channel then they know exactly how many people they don't have to make estimates like they do now with you know a small sample but I just want to confirm on the last bullet point what is your feeling about the number of U.S broadcasts that we would opt for this numerous option zero percent no no no they're they're no there will be some because there are stations out there uh that that you know that it really aren't making any money that they're they're in a in a small Market where there's not a lot of population and there's more TV stations than they they need in that market and they're likely to say you know if you'll give me some money I'm willing to go away um you've also got uh we have sort of a mixture of commercial and non-commercial stations in the U.S and you have some of the markets where the non-commercial stations where you have more than one of them more than one Public Broadcasting Service and some of them are owned by you know colleges or universities and some of them are not you know really are just a money drain on the University or something and they would probably be willing to just get rid of it but and they'll participate and I don't know what the number is likely to be but I just don't see many you know in in larger markets you know the commercial stations and the even you know in the big markets even the the low end guy is still making money that's the spectrum's valuable why is it you know everybody wants it it's valuable so I just don't see that you'll you know they'll get that many for to participate in the markets where they need it or at a price that they do willing to pay for it the big chunk of spectrum is used to sell only 10 of the population what do you think the U.S broadcasters need to do to make it more you know to justify they they need to move forward so that they do get to this bigger audience that they have out there on the portable and mobile devices I mean we do have a system now that will do that uh there's a part of the new of the atsc Digital television system where you can do well and mobile and handheld and there are a number of stations there's probably about somewhere between 10 and 15 percent of the stations have built out that facility and are are actually transmitting that they're trying to increase that number significantly there's a two different groups in the U.S that have been promoting this and uh one of them is is backed by some of the major networks by by NBC and fox in particular in the US are backing that and they're promoting it pretty heavily I don't think it's the best solution because this was sort of an afterthought to the system and so it's uh it works but it doesn't work nearly as well as it should and I think that we're we've got to be looking to the next generation of systems which is it's just coming along fairly quickly and in fact I was at a a meeting here a few weeks ago where there was FCC people there and somebody proposed that the commission doesn't have to complete this this whole process until 2022 I think why don't you delay this until we come up with this new system and we'll do the whole transition all at one time because he also expected the new system will be much more efficient and so you actually maybe could free up spectrum because it won't take nearly as much Spectrum to transmit the same thing that you're doing now so but the fcc's reaction the the person that was there of course couldn't really say because he's not authorized to do that but I didn't like the way it answered it his answer was don't even ask you know it wasn't well we could think about that no it was just don't ask so they're being pushed by this by you know as I say it always comes down to money and there's money behind this and so that's what's that's what's driving it uh I went to uh remind me to share some comments on the future uh possibility of convergence of broadcasting the communication industry so basically you know I feel the basic assumption here is that you know in the future we still have two separate Industries so uh I'm not sure though is there any regulation barrier to achieve this kind of future conversions there are some regulatory barriers which would have to be overcome but I think that's a whole lot easier to overcome than some of the the hurdles that we're trying to do here and I think that you know I mean it will come I mean you're going to get to the point where you'll have devices that will do sort lots of things you know you can make your cell phone calls you can surf the web or you can watch television on it and that will come eventually but you've just got to get all these people together and say look guys you've got to have to have to have to participate here and you're going to have to figure out how to make this work but uh but it's it's all doable it's just going to take time and uh you know and the will to do it well for showing such good leadership in initiating this very difficult subject for the whole for the whole of the industry um and uh it's like a few it's the future is one of the key issues in the future of broadcasting and uh it'll be a challenge for the future generations of broadcast Engineers to do so I'd like us to give a warm a warm thank you for making thank you no appreciation to give you these two things yeah thank you thank you thank you thank you