Nearly 70% of U.S. Homes Have HDTVs

texasguy37 · ‎05-18-2009

Here is an excerpt from an interesting article on the increase in HDTV ownership found in the link below:

The number of HDTV in U.S. households continues to rise, hitting 69%, according to new consumer research from Leichtman Research Group, Inc. (LRG), up from 17% in 2006.

That means 52% of U.S. homes have adopted it in the last five years.

The survey also found that a growing number homes have multiple HD sets, with 48% of HDTV households having more than one HDTV. Overall, about one-third of all U.S. households now have multiple HDTV sets -- up from about one-sixth of all households two years ago, and 4% five years ago.

Yet about 45% of TV sets in HD households, and close to 60% of all TV sets in the US, are not HDTVs, which means a great deal of viewing still occurs in standard-definition.

"In just the past five years, over half of all US households have adopted HDTV, bringing the total to nearly 70% of all households having at least one HDTV set" said Bruce Leichtman, president and principal analyst for Leichtman Research Group, Inc. "While lower prices have helped to expand the base of HD households, and those who have multiple HDTV sets, still close to 60% of all TV sets in US households are not HDTVs -- this provides ample opportunity for the sale of more HDTV sets going forward."

The findings are based on a survey of 1,302 households throughout the United States for the new LRG study, "HDTV and 3D TV 2011." It is the ninth annual iteration of the HD study.

The survey also found relatively robust demand for new HD sets, despite poor economic conditions. About 21% of all households purchased a new TV set in the past 12 months, and 19% of all households plan to purchase a new TV set in the next 12 months.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/478497-Nearly_70_of_U_S_Homes_Have_HDTVs_Leichtman_Research.php

aviewer · ‎03-11-2010

Since the HD sets exceed the SD sets by such a great margin the HD channels should now be moved to the primary numbering (below 1000) and the SD channels moved to the secondary numbering (above 1000).

Since the original number scheme was implemented to favor the majority (SD) viewers over the less deployed HD, it is only fair to reverse the numbering plan now that the set deployment is reversed.

texasguy37 · ‎05-18-2009

aviewer wrote:

Since the HD sets exceed the SD sets by such a great margin the HD channels should now be moved to the primary numbering (below 1000) and the SD channels moved to the secondary numbering (above 1000).

Actually, that is not what the survey says:

Yet about 45% of TV sets in HD households, and close to 60% of all TV sets in the US, are not HDTVs, which means a great deal of viewing still occurs in standard-definition.

SomeJoe7777 · ‎01-30-2008

Furthermore, on those 40% of all TVs that are HD, not all the programming viewed on them is in HD. Depending on the channel desired and the provider/method of reception, the programming may be in SD anyway even on the HD sets.

I would say that at least 67% (2/3rds) of programming or more is still watched in SD.

oufanindallas · ‎02-08-2010

I have 3 HDTVs and two of them are on nothing but HD if I'm watching. The 3rd is in my 3yo's room and Nick Jr. isn't in HD. Disney is though.

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway

spd2demun · ‎07-28-2007

We replaced 4 of our 5 with HDTVs and haven't looked back. There is a great improvement in the amount of heat they generate in a room, compared to the old SDs.

Never replaced the 5th TV, it just got recycled. Coax run is still on a splitter to my office, but with carpet getting removed, it will need to be wired through the attic, or would need a Wireless box.

Phil-101 · ‎11-18-2011

Moved:

Moved for better exposure

Kerry78 · ‎11-03-2011

I need to save some penny's and upgrade mine
I still have a 15yr Old Panasonic widescreen tv lol

It's done really well I think

oz_1 · ‎10-25-2008

It should be about time for providers to quit charging for HD versus SD when its this mainstream even the local channels OTA here are at least 90% HD programing.

This to me is like charging for color versus black & white.

spd2demun · ‎07-28-2007

Agree, but you know they won't.

RCSMG · ‎12-10-2007

If they said they were going to stop charging for HD channels they would only make up the charge some other way. KIind of like Bank Of A******.

spd2demun · ‎07-28-2007

You know it!

RCSMG wrote:

If they said they were going to stop charging for HD channels they would only make up the charge some other way. KIind of like Bank Of A******.

oz_1 · ‎10-25-2008

What makes it bad you can not purchase a standard definition TV and have not been able to for the last couple of years besides the fact who would want one and once you see HD

there is no going back.

spd2demun · ‎07-28-2007

But I guess until ALL channels are HD (and some content never will be since it's old), they'll get away with charging the fee. Besides, Comcrap's been doing it for years (their role model?).

There are still some channels (including Premiums) that do not have HD counterparts.

Yeah, I can't go back to SD, unless HD goes black (local news) and I have no choice.

dhascall · ‎04-21-2008

I think that eventually charging for HD will be passe (that is so 29 seconds ago). How much extra does it truly cost for U-Verse to carry HD? Do the encoders,, receivers and parts /pieces to carry HD, have to be replaced every day? Lol.

texasguy37 · ‎05-18-2009

The channel owners charge additional carriage fees for the HD versions of the channel.

SomeJoe7777 · ‎01-30-2008

texasguy37 wrote:

The channel owners charge additional carriage fees for the HD versions of the channel.

Which is kind of ridiculous, because many of them no longer maintain separate SD and HD infrastructure. FOX switched everything to pure HD last year, and now their "SD" feed is just a downconvert of the HD feed.

oz_1 · ‎10-25-2008

A lot of people don't know that if the movie was shot in wide screen on film years ago

its already in HD only video that was done in the original 4;3 format will remain in SD without going back and doing digital transfers with a lot of enhancements and most of that was dated TV shows and documentaries not cost effective.

texasguy37 · ‎05-18-2009

SomeJoe7777 wrote:

Which is kind of ridiculous, because many of them no longer maintain separate SD and HD infrastructure. FOX switched everything to pure HD last year, and now their "SD" feed is just a downconvert of the HD feed.

Could be. I'm sure at some point down the road, things will be different when there are no longer SD versus HD channels. There will just be one version of every channel.

RCSMG · ‎12-10-2007

They will drop the hd fee and almost simultaneously to $5 fees or 3 $3.33 fees will show up. I'm just saying.

spd2demun · ‎07-28-2007

Marketing...maybe an HD Recovery Fee for SD.

ceh4702 · ‎04-03-2012

My mother, just purchased a new Samsung 60" HD Smart TV and does not even have Internet. The good news is she can see the TV from 30 feet away. I was kind of surprised she had gotten such a large expensive TV. But the TV is nice even if she is only getting the basic package. So she is affecting the statistics. She also has a 32" TV in 720p

ceh4702 · ‎04-03-2012

Since the USA Federal Govt forces people to buy HDTV's it should be illegal to charge more for HD Content.

SomeJoe7777 · ‎01-30-2008

ceh4702 wrote:

Since the USA Federal Govt forces people to buy HDTV's it should be illegal to charge more for HD Content.

Ummm ... What?

There is no regulation in place at any governmental level that requires any TV sold in this country to have any particular set of features, resolution, or tuning capability.

texasguy37 · ‎05-18-2009

There are also many people who have HDTV's who do not and see no need to subscribe to HD programming. They say that the SD programming is just fine for them.

JefferMC · ‎11-16-2009

SomeJoe7777 wrote:
ceh4702 wrote:
Since the USA Federal Govt forces people to buy HDTV's it should be illegal to charge more for HD Content.

Ummm ... What?

There is no regulation in place at any governmental level that requires any TV sold in this country to have any particular set of features, resolution, or tuning capability.

The requirement that he is undoubtedly refering to is the requirement that any TV that has a tuner, must include an ATSC tuner. That covers Digital TV, not HD TV, per se.

SomeJoe7777 · ‎01-30-2008

True, if it has a tuner, that tuner must at least be capable of receiving and decoding all ATSC transmissions. And it must be able to decode and display closed captions.

But those are the only two requirements, and those apply only if the device has a tuner. It does not imply that the screen must be HD resolution, or even widescreen in shape.