Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Best Buy, Wal-Mart, Others Fined Over Digital TV Notices

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Sat Apr 12, 2008 06:31 AM
from the caught-with-your-pants-down dept.
Ian Lamont writes "The FCC has fined 11 retailers and television manufacturers for violating rules relating to the 2009 digital TV transition. Best Buy, Circuit City, Target, Sears, Kmart, and Wal-Mart supposedly failed to place notices near analog-only TV sets warning customers that the sets did not have digital tuners. In part, the required notice reads: 'This television receiver has only an analog broadcast tuner and will require a converter box after February 17, 2009, to receive over-the-air broadcasts with an antenna because of the Nation's transition to digital broadcasting. Analog-only TVs should continue to work as before with cable and satellite TV services, gaming consoles, VCRs, DVD players, and similar products.' The fines total $6.6 million."
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • With the money they make on cheapy tv's this is just the cost of business. Wally world still sells a ton of cheap analog 27in.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      I challenge this idea that 6 million dollar fines are just considered a cost of doing business. have any of you actually dealt with an accounting department before? as a manager, if you cost ANY company 6.6 million your ass would be fired and there would be hell to pay.
      • by cheebie (459397) on Saturday April 12 2008, @08:39AM (#23046258)
        But what if that $6 million fine was the result of an extra $60 million profit from selling cheap TVs for people to put in their bathroom/camper/boat/etc?

        These fines should be based on some percentage of the profits from the activity in question. And that percentage should be over 100%.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          But what if that $6 million fine was the result of an extra $60 million profit from selling cheap TVs for people to put in their bathroom/camper/boat/etc?

          For your scenario to make sense, they would not only have to sell enough TV's to create that much profit, but they'd have to sell them to people who would not have bought one if those signs had actually been placed on the TV's. Considering how few people actually care about over-the-air programming, I find that rather unlikely.

          • by cheebie (459397) on Saturday April 12 2008, @11:47AM (#23047436)
            If you think people don't care about over-the-air programming anymore, you're probably only talking to well-off people. I know people who can't afford extra money every month for cable. But they could afford a one-time outlay for a small TV.

            Also, how's that cable gonna work on a boat, or camping? There's still a good market for cheap TVs.
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              If you think people don't care about over-the-air programming anymore, you're probably only talking to well-off people. I know people who can't afford extra money every month for cable. But they could afford a one-time outlay for a small TV.

              I never said these people don't exist. In fact, I specifically made an allowance for just such individuals by saying "considering how few people actually care about over-the-air programming". In other words, while there are still people out there who do care about OT

        • by cybereal (621599) on Saturday April 12 2008, @03:16PM (#23048744) Homepage

          But what if that $6 million fine was the result of an extra $60 million profit from selling cheap TVs for people to put in their bathroom/camper/boat/etc?

          These fines should be based on some percentage of the profits from the activity in question. And that percentage should be over 100%.
          It isn't going to be, there is no chance that the 3-4 analog sets remaining in these stores makes that much revenue let alone profit.

          In fact, in most of these stores I have personally seen the warning signs that are required, so they are not skirting the issue. Most likely, a few individual stores failed to properly update their signage according to the corporate directions and that's resulting in the fine. The most likely result will either be store manager firings or at best, a massive training effort to prevent this from happening in the future.

          Furthermore the constitutionality of intentionally harming the profitability of a business as a penalty is suspect. Fines generally must be the same for anyone who violates the rules, and not based on percentages of facts about them.
      • by hymie! (95907) on Saturday April 12 2008, @08:50AM (#23046318)

        if you cost ANY company 6.6 million your ass would be fired and there would be hell to pay.
        RTFA. The fines (plural) total $6.6 million. The largest fine (for a merchant) was $1.1 million
      • The fines total $6.6 million. That means not a single company is paying $6 million, but a group of 11 retailers and manufacturers.

        The biggest fines went to Sears and subsidiary Kmart, nearly $1.1 million; Wal-Mart, $992,000; and TV manufacturer Syntax-Brillian, nearly $1.3 million.

        So adding that up, Sears(1.1)+KMart(1.1)+Syntax-Brillian(1.3)+Wal-Mart(.992) = $4.492 million. Which leaves another $2.1 million to split between 7 other companies. Wal-Mart probably makes over $6.6 million in electronics in a

        • I don't know how it is in other states, but here (AR) the 27in analog for $259 flies off the shelf almost as fast as they can put them up. Here in AR most folks don't bother with OTA due to all the mountains and valleys making for a lousy reception, so the $259 set hooked to cable/sat makes for a good deal. And we tech guys seem to forget that there are a lot of folks that don't know squat about tech and would be spooked off by the sign(I can't remember seeing any sign a couple of months ago when Mom got one of those 27in for her sat) so I can see a local Wal Mart deciding the profits made from the cheap sets were worth taking the fine. I know my Mom would have probably passed had she seen a sign and I wasn't there, even though she hasn't watched a minute of OTA tv since '82. But that is my 02c, YMMV.
  • by Dishevel (1105119) on Saturday April 12 2008, @06:40AM (#23045716)
    Companies don't really like telling you that thing you are about to buy sucks.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Companies don't really like telling you that thing you are about to buy sucks.

      Their shareholders should be up in arms about the companies wasting the chance to upsell customers on a converter box, but they're too stupid and lazy to care either.
    • by ddrichardson (869910) on Saturday April 12 2008, @08:07AM (#23046126) Homepage

      Oddly enouugh, Tesco (Walmarts competitor in the UK) are running an advertising campaign on TV just now where this is the exact premise. "Buy our budget mushrooms, they're ugly as sin but are cheap and going in a pie anyway". Novel approach.

    • Companies don't really like telling you that thing you are about to buy sucks.
      How about fining everyone that spent the last few years marketing UHF only antennas as "HD antennas" when in fact, huge numbers of stations all over the country are moving their digital broadcast to their old VHF frequency in 2009.

      At least addressing an analog TV doesn't require climbing up on your roof.
  • by BUL2294 (1081735) on Saturday April 12 2008, @06:54AM (#23045772)
    ...go to the purchasers, who got duped, into buying said TVs? NO...

    Why, oh, why didn't the government ban imports of analog-only TVs after a certain date (say 1-2 years ago)? I mean this would have solved 95% of the problem...
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      I think that people are making far too much of an issue of the whole thing. Digital tuner boxes are cheap, simple and easy to get hold of. I know we're on a slightly different system here, but they start at about £10 which is equivalent to $20, half the value of the vouchers that your government is dishing out for the switchover! A product that will need a £10 upgrade for some users (i.e. those without cable or satellite) really does not need to be banned from import.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Those are UK Freeview tuners. Which are cheaper specifically because they do not receive HD. The US went for HD from the start, which costs more initially, but it also means that we won't have to toss out a bunch of electronics all over again to maybe get HD by 2012, like will happen in the UK. Some of us have been getting HD for over four years now.

        Sure, a lot of the programming is up-converted and window-boxed (new studio equipment isn't cheap and can only be manufactured so fast, not to mention the SD r

        • by cdrudge (68377) on Saturday April 12 2008, @07:53AM (#23046044) Homepage

          Those are UK Freeview tuners. Which are cheaper specifically because they do not receive HD. The US went for HD from the start, which costs more initially, but it also means that we won't have to toss out a bunch of electronics all over again to maybe get HD by 2012, like will happen in the UK. Some of us have been getting HD for over four years now.
          DTV != HDTV. The cheap or free tuners (after coupon) [walmart.com] are not high definition, they are only standard. The US is switching over to a digital television...which just happens to include some high definition programming.
          • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

            I never said the converter box tuners output HD. But they must still receive and decode HD signals. Why? Because that's the only thing out there for them to receive. (Did you see where I used the word "down-convert"?) Most US stations are only broadcasting their main programming over an HD signal.

            Freeview boxes have no capability to receive an HD signal. (In fact, the UK hasn't even finalized the specs on HD yet!) The UK will have to simulcast an SD signal for the old SD-only Freeview boxes "forever". Once

          • by BUL2294 (1081735) on Saturday April 12 2008, @08:34AM (#23046234)

            DTV != HDTV. The cheap or free tuners (after coupon) are not high definition, they are only standard.
            You need to clarify your statement here. The converter boxes are required to down-convert all ATSC digital channels, both HDTV and SDTV , including 16x9 1080i, using an analog connection (RF, composite, or S-Video) to a TV/VCR/display. RF and composite connectors are required of all converter boxes available thru this program. S-Video connections are permitted, but anything higher than S-Video (specifically DVI, HDMI, Component, Ethernet, Firewire, and 802.11 wireless) is expressly prohibited.

            Not every HDTV channel has a multiplexed SDTV version of that same channel, and requiring one would use up bandwidth, degrading the primary HDTV channel's picture mode (i.e. down from 1080i to 720p).

            NTIA at the US-DOC has a very readable document listing the requirements for a CECB [doc.gov]--a Coupon-Eligible Converter Box. It's too bad that the NTIA didn't "lock-down" the design more as CECBs will have differing feature sets (i.e. program guide, S-Video, etc.)
        • The US really needed to move to HD faster because NTSC is nasty.
      • Slightly different system? DVB-T is totally different than ATSC. Without getting into the merits of one system over another, DVB-T is not as advanced as ATSC (granted, DVB-T2 will be more advanced than ATSC--3 years from now), and the technology has been out longer, so the digital-to-analog converters are cheaper due to economies of scale... At best, you've made an apples-to-oranges comparison.
      • by vtcodger (957785) on Saturday April 12 2008, @07:31AM (#23045924)
        Unfortunately, since the US uses NTSC for analog and our frequency allocations are different from anyplace outside the Western Hemisphere and I believe our digital formats also are unique, your $20 converters won't work here. Ours didn't even show up in the stores until about 30 days ago and cost USD $60 or so. There is will be $40 off coupons available from the government and I've requested one, but it hasn't turned up yet. Oh yeah, and last time I looked, only 3 of our 8 local stations have their DTV transmitters on the air.

        And there is the seldom mentioned problem that analog TV viewers tend to be folks living on small incomes, fixed incomes, or both. They don't necessarily have even $20 to spare.

        I'm curious how well digital is going to work in my area which has a lot of hills and where folks tend to get marginal coverage. Analog coverage around here used to be described as "one and a half stations". Rumor has it that digital coverage is not as good as it was with analog. Oh yeah, cable coverage around here is minimal. I have cable. Folks in the next towns out from Burlington don't have cable (or DSL, but that's another story). And not everyone has a clear line of sight to satellites.

        The US DTV rollout has been an on-going shambles. It looks like they are going to procede with it whether digital works or not. I wouldn't bet that they don't turn analog back on about 30-60 days after they turn it off. There are possibly going to be a LOT more complaints than anyone anticipates.

        I'm not against digital, but the entire roll out in the US has been a textbook study in how NOT to manage a technology upgrade. We'll see what happens in about ten months.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          The nice thing about analog, was that you could get 1/2 a station. Analog degrade gracefully. Sometimes you lose a bit of the picture, or the sound is a little garbled, but you can at least get something. It's kind of like watching Youtube. The quality is terrible, but at least you can make out what's going on. Anybody with satellite can probably tell you that when you get a bad signal, the whole thing drops out and becomes completely unwatchable. I know many people with satellite, and often when ther
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            The nice thing about digital is that it includes a lot of redundant error correction information so that you can lose a lot of the signal before you lose any of the picture. My parents live in a hilly area and their picture quality went up significantly when they switched to digital. When conditions are really bad, they see artefacts (usually blocks of primary colours), but most of the time they have a crisp clear signal where they used to have a fuzzy one.
          • I hope the same won't be true for digital broadcasts.
            It is. Most of the channels are compressed to fuck, so a single drop of rain or a less than perfect signal is enough to make them unwatchable.
        • I would be interested to know what market you live in (or what stations you receive) that only 3 of 8 are on the air. I can't say I've heard of any market with such low numbers.
        • by xaxa (988988) <slashdot.symbiote@eu> on Saturday April 12 2008, @07:31AM (#23045926) Homepage

          I don't really think you can apply your country's pricing to the cost of the devices in the United States. Here the cheapest they go for is about $60. So to say that it's half the cost of a $40 voucher doesn't exactly make sense.
          If there weren't vouchers from the state (and there aren't in the UK), you can bet they'd be $40 cheaper ;-)
          • Economics still work if a voucher is in play, it just sets a minimum price. (It makes no sense to offer the converter at $39 when you're guaranteed to get at least one dollar more as long as your customers are rational.)

            If one company is selling them at $60 and one is selling them at $50, the guy selling for $50 is actually selling at half the price for the consumer.
    • by Megane (129182) on Saturday April 12 2008, @07:06AM (#23045818)

      Actually, they did ban the manufacture, import or interstate shipment [dtvfacts.com] of analog-only TV sets a little over a year ago, which was two years before the analog broadcasting cutoff. That doesn't mean that there weren't six months or more of analog-only TV sets in the warehouses. And this also applies to VCRs, DVRs, and any other device which has an NTSC tuner, but no ATSC tuner.

      Also, this only applies to sets with a tuner. Tuner-less sets (aka "monitors") are exempt.

  • Thrift store TVs (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Megane (129182) on Saturday April 12 2008, @06:54AM (#23045774)

    Goodwill and oter thrift stores (and maybe even pawn shops) better hope they don't get noticed for not putting the notice on the TVs themselves. I know that Goodwill has just been sticking up the notice in a random place on the wall or something. And right now thrift stores and pawn shops are probably the main place to find analog-only TV sets. But hey, as long as they have a video input, they're still useful for video games. And they will still work with an external tuner.

    On the other hand, I've gotten two satellite tuners with ATSC at thrift stores for ten bucks each. One even had a broken analog NTSC tuner, which I found amusing. Unfortunately I wasted another ten bucks because I didn't realize that the DirecTV H10 and H20 require a satellite subscription to receive ATSC. Bargain hunters, stay away from those two models!

  • by dpbsmith (263124) on Saturday April 12 2008, @06:57AM (#23045786) Homepage
    I dislike Wal*Mart. And if they were fined I'm sure they deserved it.

    But my personal experience is that I've only seen those notices twice within the last year, and both times were in Wal*Marts. One was in Wisconsin, late last summer; the other in Massachusetts. I didn't see any notices at all when I was recently in Best Buy.

    And: the day I received my converter coupons in the mail, which was February 29th--I must have been among the very first to get them--I called Wal*Mart to see if they had converter boxes; they said yes, I got there and they had a huge display of them in a featured location in the aisle just outside their electronics department, the pre-coupon price was $50, and they were ready and happy to process my $40 coupons.

    Based on my highly scientific sample size of two, I don't see any indication that Wal*Mart is dragging its feet. Offhand I'd think they're making a good-faith effort to comply. If they haven't been getting the notices up I'd attribute it to general chaos and cluelessness, not to any systematic attempt to unload analog sets on unsuspecting customers.

    • Offhand I'd think they're making a good-faith effort to comply. If they haven't been getting the notices up I'd attribute it to general chaos and cluelessness, not to any systematic attempt to unload analog sets on unsuspecting customers.

      Is there some famous quote about malice and incompetence? I'm sure it applies to any of the retail chain stores that were fined.

      That said, I want to know where these fines are going. That's our money after all, just like all the money that they are collecting by selling o
    • I didn't see any notices at all when I was recently in Best Buy.

      My local Best Buy has been putting big white stickers that explain the situation (in BIG type) on the sides of analog-tuner TV boxes since February 2007. I've never noticed any signage in the TV area (I haven't really looked for the past several months either), but I do know that there has been some sort of hard-to-miss notification.
      • "I'm so confused! Why do people give money to organizations they dislike?!"

        You beat me to it. Dut then again i do pay taxes. But Wal Mart is much easier to avoid.
  • Why would any store hesitate to post that notice? It's one of the most opaque examples of beureaucratic English I've seen in a long time: Run-on sentences; subordinate clauses out of place and badly punctuated; any good Junior High English teacher could get a full hour's lecture out of it.
  • by itsdapead (734413) on Saturday April 12 2008, @07:32AM (#23045928)

    At least it sounds as if the US are going to yank the elastoplast off in one go and just switch in 2009. Here in the UK they're pussyfooting around by turning it off region by region over a 4 year period.

    The TV ads are dumb - too: they're clearly designed by marketdroids who's aim in life is to establish "the Digital tick" logo and their cute little robot mascot as Brands - which is not the same as delivering factual information to people who - if they haven't got the message after 5 years - need a gentle tap with the cluebat.

    Me, I'd do it like this:

    (Burst of interference followed by black screen)

    Voicover (the woman from "Weakest Link" or similar):

    If you don't get a digital TV box in the next few months, your screen will go black permanently.

    So take some personal responsibility and find out about what you need - and check that someone's sorting it all out for the little old lady next door, too. In fact, while you're at it, check that she's eating properly and her heater is working because if she's that isolated and can't even save up £30 for a Digibox, missing Eastenders for a week is going to be the least of her worries.

    For pity's sake, people, its been in the news for the last 5 years and at the end of the day its only TV - its not like we're turning off the water supply or something!

    ...but then I was born with a defect in the gene responsible for political expediency.

    • I would raise the stakes and have Anne Droid (from that Doctor Who episode) chargin' her laser at a bunch of people who didn't get a converter box. It's just too bad that the laser won't work through the telly, becuase I hear you folks over there could use a reduction in the chav population.
  • by timmarhy (659436) on Saturday April 12 2008, @07:50AM (#23046026)
    you can plug in that tv from 1990 and it'll still work people... talk about fud
  • ... is it used to purchase digital to analog converters for those who bought such analog TV's?

    Very doubtful!!!

    So the consumer gets screwed and based on that screw job the legal system, whatever it is, then screws the screwers.
    Ultimately the consumers get nothing and the advertisers have less audience.

    So in the end the advertisers get screwed too.

    I'm confused, Who benefits?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      This may sound somewhat conspiratory... but they stop Analog TV, they stop Radio Broadcast TV... "they" end up having complete control over TV... who can see it, for what price, and whats on the channels... because Bob, In South Dakota cant afford to upgrade to Digital, and his little 15watt transmitter is now void... there goes the local channel 10, you gotta watch Big Brother 16 in 1080p, cause... thats your only option..its on all 255 channels...

      Kinda like the inability to protest in many places these da
  • by pla (258480) on Saturday April 12 2008, @09:26AM (#23046492) Journal
    The FCC has fined 11 retailers and television manufacturers

    The FCC did what now?

    The FCC has the authority to regulate the use of a few communications-valuable portions of the RF spectrum.

    To the best of my knowledge, they have no authority to regulate trade. We even have a similarly-named governmental TLA for that - The FTC.

    Anyone care to 'splain it to me, by what stretch of the imagination fining retailers satisfies the goal of allocating spectrum for the greatest public good?
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      The FCC did what now? The FCC has the authority to regulate the use of a few communications-valuable portions of the RF spectrum. To the best of my knowledge, they have no authority to regulate trade. We even have a similarly-named governmental TLA for that - The FTC. Anyone care to 'splain it to me, by what stretch of the imagination fining retailers satisfies the goal of allocating spectrum for the greatest public good?

      By your logic, then the FDA shouldn't able to fine supermarkets for changing the ex

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      To the best of my knowledge, they have no authority to regulate trade. We even have a similarly-named governmental TLA for that - The FTC.

      Your knowledge is deficient. Congress provided the FCC with that authority when they enacted the All-Channel Receiver Act of 1962.

  • To any *one* of those companies that's peanuts, chump change, zilch, zero, nada, an executive retreat.

    Now $60M, or $600M, spread across them all would have gotten their attention and made a "Don't do this again" statement.

    Anything else is just toothless posturing.
  • If there wasn't a coupon program, I'd say this thing would retail for $15 and they'd make money. Charge $49.00 and the consumer is out 10 bucks, thinks it's a bargain. Meanwhile the stores get every penny of that coupon for something that cost them $10. Considering they have DVD players right next to these things for just $29, it pretty much shows they are making immense profits off those boxes at government expense.
  • Can anybody point me to a Linux compatible D-TV(good) or HDTV(better) tv tuner that will allow for full myth-tv integration? I am moving soon (and not replacing my Bell ExpressVu Sat. TV) as I will live close to Detroit, Michigan and a cheap TV-tower will give me all the channels that I would want to watch.

  • by drDugan (219551) on Saturday April 12 2008, @12:51PM (#23047838) Homepage
    yet another reason to remove the TV from your life. now we have a device that not only shuts off your brain and delivers unhelpful marketing into your home, but on top of that, it has government support to encourage a digital system that is both more expensive than working alternatives and allows increased information access control.

    every time I see places where consumer marketplaces have heavy handed intervention from government (read: not regulation to protect consumers, but rules or supports to direct consumer behavior), it seems there is something wrong. corporations a bit too close to the state.

    in a healthy marketplace, if digital TV products and services can't out compete and win vs. the analog systems, then they would lose. period. if the government is going to come in and with the corporate-directed, lobby-directed practice of mandating a specific technology -- just because it works better for the business practice of some large companies -- well, this is not in most people's interest.

    the truculent refusal to admit the changing nature of content distribution and actions like this with digital TV on the part of existing content and hardware companies has already has created a vibrant black market for their products. luckly many people are building alternatives...

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      The notices are up in my local Sears, and have been for quite some time.