ASO Transition models

Several different models to digital switch-over have been adopted, depending on the local circumstances (see previous paragraph on ASO factors). However, two basic models can be identified (with combinations and in-between variants):

1. ASO with simulcast period, with two sub-categories:

a. Phased approach to analogue switch-off: region by region the analogue transmitters are switched-off. In principle, such a switch-off approach can be combined with a two basic roll-out scenarios for the DTTB network:

i. The DTTB network is also rolled out in a phased approach, region by region, or;

ii. The DTTB network is already available with (near) nationwide coverage before the first transmitters are switched-off;

b. National approach to analogue switch-off: on a nationwide scale, the analogue transmitters are switched-off at one moment in time whilst a (near) nationwide DTTB network is available;

190 For determining the available DTTB spectrum, see section 2.3. For the technical utilization of the available spectrum and network planning see section 4.2 and 4.3.

2. ASO without simulcast period (in limited geographical areas or specific regions): the analogue transmitters are switched-off and at the same moment (i.e. one or several hours later) the digital transmitters are switched-on at the same transmitter site(s).

ASO with simulcast and a phased approach to analogue switch-off

"In a phased approach, analogue switch-off takes place in a given country region by region ‘DTTB network planners’ (i.e. a special task force with industry and government participation) prepare a timetable detailing when analogue transmitters will be shut off throughout the country.

A phased approach provides several benefits:

1. DTTB planners can apply the lessons learned in one region to improve the process in another region. Should something go wrong after analogue switch-off, the ‘damage’ is limited to a single region;

2. The released frequencies can be re-used in a neighboring region in order to increase its DTTB coverage and expand the DTTB service offering;

3. DTTB planners are able to spread the cost and resource the effort of digitalization in a more manageable manner.

The phased approach has been used in Austria, Germany, Norway and Sweden. Other countries likely to use this approach include Spain, France and Italy.

In countries, such as the UK, that have opted to launch national DTT services before beginning analogue switch-off, it has been possible to observe how the DTT market develops before finally deciding how and when to end analogue services. This has generally been the case in countries with many households depending on the analogue terrestrial television platform"

ASO with simulcast and a national approach to analogue switch-off

"In a national approach to analogue switch-off, analogue services are ended simultaneously across the whole country. All viewers benefit from the advantages of digital switchover, as viewers are treated equally and given the same access to services but equally all suffer from the need to equip for digital (either for the DTTB platform or any other competing platform such as satellite or cable).

However, this approach can in most cases only be adopted after DTTB services have been launched and made available to all viewers. In Finland, where DTTB services reached nearly 100% of the population, it was possible to switch-off the analogue platform on one set date. This approach was adopted in Finland, Andorra, the Netherlands and Luxembourg and is planned for use in Denmark.

In a unique variation to this strategy, the Swiss public service broadcaster SRG-SSR switched-off two out of its four analogue channels across the country as early as March 2002. It was only after this partial analogue switch-off that it launched the DTT platform. However, such action seemed only to be acceptable to viewers because of the low viewing rates of the switch-off channels (due to multi language channels)".

A nationwide approach will concentrate the efforts at one moment in time and might be difficult to manage (depending on the scale of the involved networks). However, a nationwide switch-off has the following benefits:

1. Simple and concise communication possible to the affected viewers: no need for viewers to check when their region is going to be switched-off and no confusion possible for

‘border cases’;

2. All viewers benefit from the advantages of digital switchover, as viewers are treated equally and given the same access to services but equally all suffer from the need to equip

for digital (although depending on the roll-out of the DTTB network some viewers might have a longer simulcast period);

3. Depending on the spectrum availability, a nationwide approach could free-up spectrum more rapidly and make those frequencies available to DTTB network (for example, to increase the number of television channels/multiplexes).

ASO without simulcast

Although not applied very frequently, it is possible to switch-off the analogue transmitters without facilitating a simulcast period. In such an approach, where in a very short timeframe the analogue service is replaced by a digital service, the high simulcast costs are not incurred.

The key ASO factor determining such an approach is the political willingness to adopt this model (see above “required PSB services). The key (political) risks associated with this model are:

1. Viewers cannot switch back to their analogue platform. Please note that in both models, with and without simulcast, viewers have to purchase a digital receiver for the DTTB platform (or any other alternative). In this aspect there is no difference;

2. If something goes wrong after analogue switch-off, the damage is not confined to one region but is suffered on a nationwide scale (however, the number of affected viewers can still be limited).

Clearly the above risks will call for political willingness to adopt this model. But when available budgets for simulcasting are low and the number of potentially affected viewers are low too, this model is certainly feasible (in at least limited geographical areas) as the Dutch case has proven.

2.14.4 Implementation guidelines

The following guidance can be given in determining which ASO transition model to apply:

1. The figure below illustrates the three basic decisions:

Figure 2.14.1 Decision tree for ASO transition models.

For each decision the relevant ASO factors are mentioned between brackets:

a. Decision I:

i. Model 1: when the politicians stipulate a simulcast period [required PSB services]. This is when the (political) risks of failure are assessed high. This is likely when the analogue terrestrial television platform is relatively large, as compared to the other available platforms for PSB services [The number of analogue terrestrial television viewers] and/or added value of the DTTB platform is deemed to be low [DTTB service uptake];

I

1. ASO with Simulcast

2. ASO without Simulcast

a. + Phased Analogue switch-off

b. + National Analogue switch-off

i. + Phased DTTB roll-out

ii. + National DTTB roll-out II

III

ii. Model 2: when the politicians don’t stipulate a simulcast period and the down side risks are deemed to be low (possibly only in certain regions) [required PSB services]. This is likely when the analogue platform is relatively very small [The number of analogue terrestrial television viewers].

This type of model was applied in the Netherlands (in half of the country).

b. Decision II:

i. Model 1(a): when the [The number of analogue terrestrial television viewers] is relatively big and the sheer size of the switch over operations are relatively big (not enough resources to manage the ASO in one go);

ii. Model 1(b): when the [The number of analogue terrestrial television viewers] is relatively small. This model was applied in countries such as Finland, Andorra, the Netherlands and Luxembourg.

c. Decision III:

i. Model 1(a)(i): when the [The number of analogue terrestrial television viewers] is relatively big and available spectrum is limited [Availability of spectrum] and frequencies have to be re-used. This ASO transmission model was applied in Germany;

ii. Model 1(a)(ii): when [The number of analogue terrestrial television viewers]

is relatively big and available spectrum is not limited too much for a nationwide DTTB network with enough multiplex to have an attractive alternative [Availability of spectrum] + [DTTB service uptake]. This transmission model was applied in the UK.

2. A joint ASO process with a close cooperation with commercial parties is recommended as they have an interest to provide the viewers with a set-top-box. Commercial parties can generate revenue streams which can (partly) finance set-top-box subsidies. This obligation can be included in the DTTB frequency license terms and conditions. Such an approach should be specifically considered in case the PSB funds are limited. It is likely that the existing funding model will not be adequate to cover the investment needed to migrate to digital broadcasting transmitting network/s, let alone to (partly) finance set-top-box subsidies and the simulcast period (double network costs);

3. In case Governments would like to compensate viewers for the costs of switching to digital (i.e. purchasing a set-top-box or IDTV) a voucher system such as that applied in the US could be considered. In such a system responsibility of the Government should be limited to the primary television set and inform the viewer about the other receivers (e.g.

second sets and video recorders) in order to limited fraud.