domestic antenna systems - estimating current stock/media/research and analysis... · web viewyagi...

Domestic antenna systems—Estimating current stockResearch with consumers and industry in the Bathurst and Central Tablelands regions of NSWMARCH 2011

CanberraPurple Building Benjamin OfficesChan Street Belconnen ACT

PO Box 78Belconnen ACT 2616

T +61 2 6219 5555F +61 2 6219 5353

MelbourneLevel 44 Melbourne Central Tower360 Elizabeth Street Melbourne VIC

PO Box 13112Law Courts Melbourne VIC 8010

T +61 3 9963 6800F +61 3 9963 6899

SydneyLevel 15 Tower 1 Darling Park201 Sussex Street Sydney NSW

PO Box Q500Queen Victoria Building NSW 1230

T +61 2 9334 7700 1800 226 667F +61 2 9334 7799

© Commonwealth of Australia 2011This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Commonwealth. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Manager, Editorial Services, Australian Communications and Media Authority, PO Box 13112 Law Courts, Melbourne Vic 8010.

Published by the Australian Communications and Media Authority

Contents

Executive summary 1Key findings 1Accuracy and coverage of different methods of estimating antenna stock 4

Introduction and objectives 6Background and introduction 6

Summary of objectives 11

Research methodology 12Overview of the method 12Scoping and development of discussion guides and questionnaires 12Household survey—screening phase12In-home audits and auditor training 13Technical assessment 14Street-level observations 14Industry research component14Data analysis and modelling 15

Household screening and in-home equipment audits 17Descriptive statistics 17Antenna equipment and condition 18Location of antennas 22Type of antennas and installation processes23Direction of the antenna 29Number of television sets and their age 29Perceptions of reception quality and surrounding landscape 34Connections and wallplates 38Variables that can be determined from street level auditing 41

Summary of technical assessments 43Antenna coverage 43Antenna age 44Expert assessments of observed antenna condition 46Technical antenna ratings by region 47

Mapping 49Suitability of antenna systems for analog reception 49Suitability of antenna systems for digital reception—households receiving analog channels 50Suitability of antenna systems for digital reception—those currently receiving digital signals 53

acma | iii

Contents (Continued)

Industry research 56Antenna installers, suppliers and manufacturers 56Television station personnel 64

Relative accuracy and coverage of alternative methods of estimating antenna stock 66

Appendix A 72Influence of factors other than antenna stock on digital signal strength 72

Appendix B 75Recruitment Screener—community survey 75

Appendix C 87In-home equipment audit—community survey 87

Appendix D 97Industry questionnaire—television stations 97

Appendix E 100Industry questionnaire—retailers/installers 100

4 | acma iv | acma

Executive summary

This report summarises the findings from a multi-phase investigation of household antenna stock in the Bathurst and Orange regions of NSW. The investigation included a comparison of research methodologies for estimating household antenna stock and an assessment of the suitability for each of those methods to be applied to other regions of Australia.

The project had two main objectives: Provide valid and reliable estimates of household antenna stock in the coverage

areas of Bathurst and Orange in NSW, and identify the possible implications for householders of digital switchover and channel restacking.

Develop alternative methods and tools to estimate household antenna stock that could be applied in other relevant regions in Australia.

The research methods used in the project were: telephone screening and interviewing of 500 households in the region, including

respondent-assessed or reported antenna type, age, condition and height, as well as the type and condition of antenna cabling and presence of masthead amplifiers (referred to as ‘householder responses’)

street-level observation of the antenna systems of the same 500 households, conducted by trained field staff (referred to as ‘street-level’ observations)

in-home audits of the television equipment, channel signal strength and reception quality of the same 500 households, conducted by trained field staff (referred to as ‘auditor observations’). These auditors also conducted more detailed observations of the antenna systems, walking around the outside of the home as necessary to make observations (referred to as ‘outside-home’ observations)

offsite assessment by technical experts of the signal strength measurements and antenna photographs taken by auditors (referred to as ‘technical assessment’)

industry interviews with antenna installers and suppliers in Bathurst and Orange, antenna manufacturers and importers, and field and operational personnel of the television stations operating in the area.

Key findingsAntenna type (bandwidth and polarisation) All 500 households included in the study were selected on the basis of having one

or more external antennas. Of the total, 33 per cent had two or more external antennas. Additionally, 20 per cent of householders also reported having a satellite dish (as well as other external antennas) and 18 per cent reported having an indoor antenna.A total of 24 households (less than five per cent) did not have at least one external antenna. These households were therefore screened out and not included in the subsequent study.

Consistent with all digital signals from Mount Panorama being vertically polarised VHF, 74 per cent of all antennas directed at this transmission source (primarily Bathurst households) were found to have VHF capability and 94 per cent were vertically polarised. Table 1 shows that seventy-three per cent of antennas were

acma | 0

vertically polarised VHF. The most common type was vertical VHF/UHF (39 per cent), followed by vertical VHF only (32 per cent). However, 22 per cent of antennas were vertical UHF only, four per cent were UHF only and one per cent had VHF but horizontal polarisation only.

For analog signals from Mount Panorama, antennas would be expected to be vertical and combination VHF/UHF. However, only 41 per cent of all antennas fell in this category, with the majority of others being vertical but VHF only (32 per cent) suited for ABC and Prime, or vertical and UHF only (22 per cent) as suited for the other channels.

Consistent with all digital signals from Mount Canobolas being horizontally polarised UHF, 82 per cent of antennas directed at this transmission source (primarily in Orange and surrounding areas) were UHF and 79 per cent were horizontally polarised. Seventy-eight per cent of antennas were horizontally polarised UHF. The most common type was vertical/horizontal VHF/UHF (45 per cent) followed by horizontal UHF only (27 per cent) and horizontal VHF/UHF (six per cent). However, 18 per cent of antennas were vertical VHF only.

For analog signals from Mount Canobolas, antennas would be expected to be vertical/horizontal VHF/UHF. However, only 45 per cent of all antennas fell in this category. Sixty-four per cent of antennas were vertically polarised VHF as suited for ABC and Prime, while 78 per cent of antennas were horizontal UHF as needed for the other channels.

Overall, 76 per cent of antennas were suited to digital reception of signals from Mount Canobolas or Mount Panorama, with 43 per cent of antennas having the bands and polarisation required for both analog and digital reception.

Table 1 Signal polarisation and bandwidth by signal source

Polarity Band/s Mt Panorama % (n=183) Mt Canobolas % (n=303)

Horizontal UHF only 4 27

Horizontal VHF only 0 1

Horizontal VHF/UHF 1 6

Vertical UHF only 22 2

Vertical VHF only 32 18

Vertical VHF/UHF 39 1

Vertical/horizontal VHF/UHF 2 45

Total 100 100

Antenna condition, age and heightTable 2 shows the technical ratings of the main antenna condition (in bold). For comparison purposes, the table also includes ratings made by householders and auditing field staff. Technicians assessed 49 per cent of antennas as ‘good’, 46 per cent as ‘fair’ and three per cent as ‘poor’. Householders were more likely than either auditors or technicians to rate their antenna as ‘good’. Antennas in the minor towns were less likely to be assessed by technicians as ‘good’ compared to those in Bathurst and Orange.

1 | acma

Table 2 Antenna condition

Bathurst %(n=226)

Orange %(n=233)

Others %(n=41)

Total %(N=500)

Good:Technical assessmentHousehold responseAuditor view

546042

496249

237046

496246

Fair:Technical assessmentHousehold responseAuditor view

432751

462743

681349

462647

Poor:Technical assessmentHousehold responseAuditor view

245

457

845

346

Don’t know:Technical assessmentHousehold responseAuditor view

191

261

0130

181

Total 100 100 100 100

According to technical estimates, the average age of all antennas was five years, with 91 per cent estimated to be no more than 10 years old. Antenna installers estimated that the average age was around 15 years while householders estimated the average age as 10 years. It should be borne in mind that estimating antenna age is difficult even for technical experts and results are provided for indicative purposes only.

Median height from the ground to the top of the antenna was estimated to be six to seven metres, with 93 per cent of masts being less than five metres from the ground to the top of the antenna. Further, 23 per cent of antennas had a masthead amplifier.

Digital television is not expected to require extensive upgrading of antennasBased on the technical assessment undertaken by Australian Digital Testing (ADT), households within the region do not have widespread television reception difficulties with current digital television channels. In summary: Seventy-seven per cent of all households have or are likely to have adequate

reception of all five current digital television channels. Only seven per cent of households were found to have inadequate reception.

‘Inadequate’ means no reception, partial reception (not all channels available) or poor reception with problems such as pixellation. (It should be noted, however, that signal strength can be influenced by a range of variables other than the antenna type, condition and orientation.)

A further 16 per cent were assessed as having or likely to have marginal reception (viewable but with some deterioration).

While relatively few external domestic antennas were rated as inadequate in Bathurst (six per cent) and Orange (five per cent), 21 per cent of the 41 antennas

acma | 2

sampled in the three minor towns of Blayney, Molong and Millthorpe were rated as having inadequate reception, which is a significant variation despite the small sample size.

The main conclusion is that digitisation is not expected to require extensive upgrading of antennas, with the exception of the minor towns.

Picture and sound qualityMost of the households surveyed received good or excellent reception, although there were a few variations: For analog reception, combined ‘excellent’ and ‘good’ auditor ratings were between

73 and 81 per cent for the picture quality for all channels, and between 74 and 83 per cent for audio quality.

Compared to analog reception, digital reception quality was significantly and consistently rated higher (91–95 per cent ‘excellent’ or ‘good’ for picture quality and 91–94 per cent ‘excellent’ or ‘good’ for sound quality).

Unlike analog reception, auditors rated digital sound and picture quality equivalently across all channels.

Only 1–2 per cent of the audits rated either digital picture or sound quality as ‘poor’ or ‘bad’, with minimal differences between the channels.

There were no significant variations in digital ratings between households receiving a signal from Mount Panorama or Mount Canobolas.

Antenna installers, suppliers and manufacturersEleven installers (including one who was also a major local supplier), one importer and one manufacturer were interviewed.

The average number of years that installers had been in the business was 28 years, with a range from five to 50, suggesting a mature industry.

Between them, the eleven installers fitted approximately 2,650 antennas a year, although the range was from 50 to 800 per year per installer, with two installers (one in Bathurst, one in Orange) accounting for more than half (1,400) between them a year. Those handling lesser numbers—such as general electricians and those installing other communication equipment like CB radios—tended to either be in semi-retirement or antenna installation formed only part of their work.

Installers reported that they select antennas based on what is suitable for the area, what is proven and reliable, and what is affordable for the customer. However, some installers recommend and install different types of antennas in the one area, based on what they have found to work in the past, which may or may not be the most appropriate method. In short, they appear to learn by trial and error and stick to what they know.

Accuracy and coverage of different methods of estimating antenna stockAnalysis of data was undertaken to contrast the various methodologies employed in the project, and to recommend an alternative to expert technical assessment for application to other areas when such assessment is not feasible. Of particular interest was how closely the results from street-level, outside home and household responses matched those from the expert assessment. In addition to the relative accuracy of the methods, the extent to which the antenna variables could be measured at all (that is, their coverage) was also considered.

3 | acma

The analysis found the following: When ascertaining antenna bandwidth, the closest method to expert technical

assessment was outside-home observation, with 71 per cent of antennas being classified as the same type. While outside-home observation was only slightly more accurate than street-level observation (68 per cent) and householder responses (65 per cent), 93 per cent of antennas could be classified using this method compared to 68 per cent for street-only observation and 61 per cent for householder responses.

When recording antenna polarisation (whether the antenna is positioned horizontally, vertically or both), street-level observations (69 per cent) were slightly more accurate than outside-home observations (64 per cent). However, street-level observations could only be made in 59 per cent of households, compared to 93 per cent for the outside-home method. Householder responses had noticeably lower accuracy (41 per cent) than the other methods and coverage of 61 per cent of sampled households.

All three alternative methods resulted in measures of antenna condition that were similar to those provided by the technical experts, with just over 50 per cent of observed conditions being the same as those made by experts. However, outside-home observations had the highest coverage (98 per cent), followed by householder response (90 per cent) and street-level observations (60 per cent).

Antenna age was difficult to assess even for experts. Householder responses and expert judgment resulted in the same age-range classification in only 34 per cent of cases. While the coverage of householder responses was fairly high at 87 per cent, a significant proportion of these are likely to have been very rough estimates.

From these results as a whole, taking into account both accuracy level and household coverage, the most effective method of predicting antenna suitability for digital reception when expert technical assessment is not feasible is outside-home observations.

Comprehensive street-level observations of the key antenna variables—the band/s the antenna was designed to receive, its polarisation, its condition and its height—could only be made in 54 percent of households. This raises questions about the viability of this method because it cannot be assumed that non-observable households are randomly missing from the sample of selected households.at random.

Householder responses produced a very high proportion of ‘don’t know’ answers, with complete estimates of the antenna variables obtained for less than 58 percent of interviewed households. Consequently, this method is also limited in its potential application. The equivalent figure for outside-home observations was 94 per cent.

If the outside-home observation method is to be used, it may not be necessary to pre-recruit respondents prior to visiting the household (as with the telephone survey). An auditing team would be able to identify households to visit using an agreed selection method, and visit each household to conduct a street-level observation. Where a street-level observation cannot be made because antenna and associated equipment are not visible, the auditor may attempt to contact the householder to gain permission to view the equipment from another vantage point surrounding (but within) the property. If the householder was unavailable, the auditor would leave a card requesting the householder make contact to arrange a suitable date to revisit. In the event that a householder refused, or if contact was not established through the card drop or by subsequent revisit, the household would be replaced with another sample point, sometimes being a neighbouring property.

acma | 4

Introduction and objectivesBackground and introductionThis report summarises the findings from a multi-phase project conducted in April to June 2010, which sought to: provide valid and reliable estimates of household antenna stock in the coverage

areas of Bathurst and Orange in NSW, and the possible implications of channel restacking options

develop methods and tools that can be applied in other relevant regions in Australia.

The second objective required a comparison of methods, where results from various data collection methods were contrasted to identify the most effective and efficient way to estimate household antenna stock. Future studies will be able to apply the methods and tools generated in this study, providing a ‘best practice’ approach to obtaining estimates that are not only valid and reliable but are also cost-efficient.

Background to the studyThe Australian Communications and Media Authority (the ACMA) is responsible for planning the use of radiofrequency spectrum for radio and television services. Planning since the mid-1990s has included the allocation of channels for digital television broadcasts for the switchover from analog to digital terrestrial television.

The switch-off of analog television broadcasts began in north-west Victoria (Sunraysia/Mildura) in the first half of 2010 and was followed by regional South Australia in the second half of 2010. Switch-off will occur in Bathurst and Orange in the first half of 2012. Metropolitan areas will be the last to switch to digital, in the second half of 2013.

While the switchover to digital television will provide benefits for many users—such as improved picture and sound quality, and greater program choice—households with antennas not capable of receiving digital signals will need to upgrade them.

Following the completion of the switchover to digital television at the end of 2013, some of the spectrum that was previously used for broadcasting will be ‘freed up’ and used for other purposes. This process is known as obtaining the ‘digital dividend’ and will involve moving some current television broadcast channels to alternative channels. This process is known as ‘restack’ and may have implications for some households in some areas.

To understand the potential impact in any broadcast region, spectrum planners use assumptions about the current antenna stock, with efforts made to reduce any need for householders to replace existing antenna systems in order to continue to receive television broadcasts. As part of the planning process, the ACMA’s broadcast planners will use information from this study, and any subsequent study, to better understand current domestic antenna stock.

At the time of writing, digital television transmission from the Mount Panorama site is all in VHF Band III, while digital transmission in the Central Tablelands from Mount Canobolas is UHF Band V. Analog transmission in both areas is a combination of VHF and UHF.

The channels currently used for analog and digital television broadcasts in the Central Tablelands area are shown in Table 3.

5 | acma

Table 3 Central Tablelands—Mount Canobolas channels for digital and analog transmission

Transmission type Channel name Channel Band PolarisationAnalog ABC 1 VHF I V

Prime 8 VHF III VSBS 30 UHF IV HSouthern Cross/TEN 33 UHF IV HWIN 39 UHF V H

Digital ABC 36 UHF V HPrime 37 UHF V HWIN 40 UHF V HSBS 42 UHF V HSouthern Cross/TEN 43 UHF V H

Figure 1 outlines the main and adequate coverage areas for the Central Tablelands areas, noting that the transmitter site is located at Mount Canobolas and it covers a wide geographic area.

acma | 6

Figure 1 Central Tablelands main and adequate coverage area

Source: ABC

7 | acma

Table 4 shows the analog and digital television channels currently used in Bathurst:

Table 4 Bathurst—Mount Panorama channels for digital and analog transmission

Transmission type Channel name Channel Band Polarisation

Analog ABC 6 VHF III VPrime 11 VHF III VSBS 46 UHF V VSouthern Cross/TEN 49 UHF V VWIN 52 UHF V V

Digital ABC 7 VHF III VSBS 9 VHF III VSouthern Cross/TEN 9A VHF III VPrime 10 VHF III VWIN 12 VHF III V

acma | 8

Figure 2 Bathurst main and adequate coverage areas

Source: ABC

Figure 2 shows that the main coverage area in Bathurst is considerably smaller than in the Central Tablelands (note that the scale is 16 km rather than 60 km) and that some suburbs, such as Eglinton and Perthville, are on the boundary of the main and adequate reception areas. Bathurst is partially covered by the ‘adequate signal’ contours of the Mount Canobolas transmission, while the focus of the Mount Panorama transmission is to provide local coverage in and around Bathurst.

Digital transmission in the Bathurst area is VHF-only and in the Central Tablelands it is UHF-only. The analog signal is a combination of UHF and VHF in both areas. There are two transmission sites on Mount Canobolas—a 170 m tower transmitting ABC and SBS programs, and a 120 m tower transmitting Southern Cross TEN, WIN and Prime. In Bathurst, ABC, SBS and Southern Cross TEN are transmitted from one site; WIN and Prime from another.

9 | acma

Summary of objectivesThe main objectives of the project were to: provide valid and reliable estimates of the household antenna stock in Bathurst and

Orange in NSW develop methods and tools that can be applied in other relevant regions of

Australia.

As part of the project, a model was developed to predict the need for antenna replacement for both digital switchover and subsequent channel changes required because of restack—both in the Bathurst and Orange areas or in other regions.

Secondary objectives of the study included the following: developing a profile of the antenna industry, including distribution by suppliers providing an overview of the antenna systems commonly installed in Bathurst and

the Central Tablelands identifying the potential impact of changes to broadcast channels for current

antenna systems.

acma | 10

Research methodologyOverview of the methodThe project included the following elements: initial scoping and technical orientation household screening and recruiting in the Bathurst and Central Tablelands areas,

involving 500 completed telephone interviews and recruitment for the subsequent in-home audits

500 in-home audits, including checking of antenna systems and associated television equipment, and direct testing of antennas

street-level auditing, involving observation of antennas from the street of the dwellings surveyed in the in-home audits

observations made on the property (‘outside-home observations’) where antennas could not be observed from the street

offsite assessment of selected auditor data by technical experts interviews with antenna installers and suppliers in Bathurst and Orange (n=12) interviews with operations managers at the five television stations operating in the

area (n=5) interviews with selected antenna suppliers, including one of the main Australian

manufacturers and an importer of a popular brand data analysis and reporting.

Scoping and development of discussion guides and questionnairesQuestionnaires for the consumer components of the study were developed following discussion with the ACMA.

Discussion guides for the industry components were written after completion of the household materials.

Household survey—screening phaseSample frame and planThe areas investigated were Bathurst and Orange, including all areas covered by the transmitter sites at Mount Canobolas, Mount Panorama and Rosewood. The postcode areas of Orange, Bathurst, Millthorpe, Blayney and Molong—with a total population of just over 85,000—were included. The population is heavily centred on the towns of Orange (39,050) and Bathurst (37,227), and is similar in each.1

In both areas, the sample was generated by random digit dialling based on matching of phone prefixes to the areas. The sample plan is in Table 5.

1 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Census, 2006.

11 | acma

Table 5 Final sample plan—completed audits

Region/Sub-region and postcode Sample size (n)

Sample proportion

Bathurst (2795) 226 0.45Orange (2800) 233 0.47Blayney (2799) 18 0.04Millthorpe (2798) 11 0.02Molong (2866) 12 0.02Total 500 1.00

To allow for some loss between the recruitment and audits, and where the equipment was found to be out of scope (for example, internal antennas only, no free-to-air services), there was over-recruitment of 10 per cent.

Screening and recruitmentThe screening interviews were conducted by Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) from DBM Consultants’ Melbourne office. The targeted respondent was the person most aware of the television equipment (including antennas and connections) in the household, aged 18 years or over. A non-substitution method was used—once the appropriate target was identified, there was no substitution. A multiple call-back design was also used, with up to five calls per dwelling made.

Information was provided to potential participants about the authenticity of the project, including the name and phone number of the ACMA project contact, and the Australian Market and Social Research Society (AMSRS) enquiry line. Brief details about the purposes of the study were also provided; this helped to improve the response rate. Once a participant was recruited, a letter was emailed or posted to them, indicating the approximate appointment time and date, as well as a more detailed explanation of the purpose of the research, and its legitimacy and confidentiality.

Field interviewers later organised times for the visit.

The questionnaire was based on the initial brief, previous research conducted in other regions, and development of issues and constructs, including extensive piloting in the target regions. The recruitment screener used is reproduced in Appendix 1.

In-home audits and auditor trainingThe in-home audits involved a series of observations as well as direct testing of the antennas in selected households, using trained interviewers who were supervised and audited by technical personnel. These personnel were trained by technical experts from ADT, and they conducted the actual testing and checking of equipment in the household, as well as all observations (both at street level and within the bounds of the householder’s property).

Training of field staff included: background to the switchover to digital television and the existing transmission

systems in Bathurst and the Central Tablelands the research methodology, including an explanation of the various phases of the

project and how they fit together technical aspects of the audits—for example, testing signals using test equipment;

recording observations about the antennas, television equipment, connections and

acma | 12

other hardware items; checking the antenna itself and identifying the types of antennas; taking compass readings; and assessing topographic and built environment features. Testers were also instructed on how to measure television reception quality (picture and sound)

administration and project management, including conduct in respondent dwellings, questionnaire administration, supervision and auditing.

Extensive piloting was undertaken to ensure that all personnel conducted the work according to the protocols developed. Technical staff accompanied field staff on visits to houses in the two areas during the first week, observing their work and providing ongoing instruction. Technical staff also checked initial questionnaires. Some household audits were conducted again due to inconsistencies and apparent errors in reported data. The sample was generated from the screening phase.

After all checking and auditing, field staff submitted data including photographs and meter readings, using online methods. The guide used for the household audits is attached as Appendix 2. It includes the street-level audits and the technical assessment/measurement sections.

Technical assessment ADT technicians reviewed the signal measurement data obtained by auditors for each household and assessed the extent to which antenna performance was adequate, marginal or inadequate for both digital and analog television broadcasts. Determining the adequacy of antennas to receive digital television transmissions was based on the current channel allocations.

Based on photographs of antenna systems taken by the auditors, ADT assessed and provided an assessment of the antenna type, condition, age and polarisation.

Street-level observationsStreet-level observations were included as part of the study because this method potentially provides a lower cost way to collect data on antenna type and condition. The data from this phase were compared to the results from the other methods, to test if this simple alternative method is viable.

The observations were conducted by the in-home auditors at the same dwellings so that direct comparisons between the two methods could be made. The antennas were observed only from the street, and simple observations of antenna condition and type were recorded.

In some cases, antennas were not visible (or not visible enough to record useful data). Comparisons made with other methods were based only on the same dwellings where useful street level data were able to be recorded without needing to enter the dwelling or involve the householder.

Industry research componentIndustry research included 12 interviews with local suppliers and installers of antennas, one interview with a local manufacturer, one interview with an importer of antennas, and five interviews with field and operations personnel from television stations.

The industry research was undertaken to determine if valid and reliable measures of antenna stock, age and condition can be determined from industry information.

13 | acma

Television stationsNames of contacts for the main television channels operating in the region were provided by the Digital Switchover Taskforce. Interviews were conducted by phone, as the respondents were geographically dispersed and some were frequently away from their office.

While an interview guide was used, these interviews were largely qualitative, with respondents sometimes raising issues like transmission quality, antennas and television equipment.

The broadcasters were able to provide historical background to television transmissions in the area and changes to the antenna stock (including connections and masts) that were not apparent from installer interviews.

The interview guide used is attached as Appendix 3.

Manufacturers and importersAntennas available in Australia are a combination of locally manufactured products (predominantly from two companies, Matchmaster and Hills Antennas) and imports, mainly from China and Europe. Interviews were held with field staff with local knowledge from one of the local manufacturers and one main importer (sourcing equipment mainly from China, based largely on Australian designs). One installer interviewed also made his own antennas.

These interviews were either conducted in person or by phone, depending on distance and availability.

Installers and suppliersInterviews were held with twelve local suppliers and installers. Of these interviewees: two were suppliers—one was a large supplier to wholesale and retail accounts, as

well as the operator of an installation company, and the other was a wholesale supplier only

ten were primarily installers—although of these, one designed and manufactured some of the antennas he installed, and one other installer imported antennas directly.

The interviews were conducted in person following phone recruitment by a member of DBM’s senior project team. Interviews took 30–60 minutes to complete and a semi-structured interview guide was used, which gave respondents scope for discussion (the guide is attached as appendix 4).

This phase is separately reported in a later part of this report, as are the comments from the television station field and operations staff. The manufacturer comments have been included with the installer comments.

Data analysis and modellingEach dwelling was assigned a unique identification number, enabling all the data from the screening exercise, in-home audits, street-level audits and technical judgement to be linked. This allowed for a comparison of the range of methods used, including the extent to which the street-level observations, outside-home audits and householder responses provided data that coincided with the assessments by the technical experts.

acma | 14

Having a range of variables collected from different methods enabled the relationship between overall antenna reception performance rating (that is, ‘adequate’, ‘marginal’, ‘inadequate’ assessments) derived from the measurements taken by the auditors and other variables, such as the antenna condition itself, location and household characteristics to be determined.

15 | acma

Household screening and in-home equipment auditsThis section summarises the findings of the interviews with respondents and the in-home auditing of equipment. The data represent the views of respondents and testing of equipment. Comparisons are made later with street-level observations and technical assessments.

Descriptive statisticsThe following data summarising the types of dwellings and the characteristics of respondents have been included for descriptive analysis, to help readers understand the region, including the existing television equipment. Dwelling type is useful as an indicator of the most valuable research method for assessing antenna type and condition.

The targeted respondent was the person who knew most about the television set in the household, with 48 per cent male and 52 per cent female respondents. The gender profile was equivalent in both Orange and Bathurst.

The age profile of respondents is shown in Table 6:

Table 6 Age profile of the regions

Age group: Bathurst %(n=226)

Orange %(n=233)

Others %(n=41)

Total %(N=500)

18–24 years 3 2 7 325–29 years 5 6 0 530–39 years 20 18 7 1840–49 years 20 22 27 2250–59 years 23 27 32 2660–69 years 18 15 22 1770 years and over

11 10 5 10

Total 100 100 100 100

The age distribution was similar for Bathurst and Orange, although the uneven distribution in the other towns was expected given the small sample size.

The dwelling types are shown in Table 7 for the three areas concerned, with the three smaller towns (Blayney, Millthorpe and Molong) most often being rural homesteads. However, according to household respondents, 13 per cent in Bathurst and 19 per cent in Orange were also rural homesteads, although slightly fewer dwellings were classified as rural homesteads according to the auditors in Orange (15 per cent) and in the minor towns combined (56 per cent).

acma | 16

Table 7 Dwelling types

Type Bathurst %(n=226)

Orange %(n=233)

Others %(n=41)

Total %(N=500)

Detached house:Household responseAuditor view

76

78

76

81

39

41

73

76Rural homestead:

Household responseAuditor view

13

13

19

15

59

56

20

18Semi-detached:


7

7

3

3

0

2

4

4Unit/apartment:


4

2

3

1

2

0

3

2Total 100 100 100 100

Antenna equipment and conditionDuring the screening phase, households that only had an internal antenna (24 households) were screened out. However, of the 500 households included in the project, 18 per cent had an internal antenna as well as an external antenna, while 53 households (11 per cent) had two or more external antennas: In addition to external antennas, 18 per cent of households also had at least one

internal portable antenna. This was the case significantly more often in Orange, with 27 per cent.

One in five households (20 per cent) also had a satellite dish; this was significantly higher in Bathurst (28 per cent).

Only one respondent (in Bathurst) had an antenna mounted in the roof space in addition to a roof-mounted antenna. This is consistent with installer views that antennas mounted in the roof space are rarely, if ever, installed in the area.

There was no relationship between the location of the dwelling and type of antenna used.

The total number of antennas in use by the 500 households surveyed was 693, an average of 1.4 per household.

17 | acma

Figure 3 Types of antennas used

CATI Q1d—What type/s of antenna/s both inside and outside do you have for your TV/s? (Base: All respondents: N=500)According to householders, most (79 per cent) of the 38 properties that were not stand-alone had their own antenna or satellite dish, rather than sharing an antenna system with adjoining households.The average age of all antennas as reported by householders was as follows: 11 years for Bathurst and 12 years for Orange, excluding the ‘don’t know’

responses 12 years in the other three towns, noting that 12 per cent were said to be up to five

years but, given that 52 per cent could not say, it is likely that the ‘real’ average may be older than 12 years.

Of all householders, 20 per cent were unable to say what the age of their antenna was, including 52 per cent of those in the three minor towns combined.

acma | 18

0

12

10

100

0

28

14

100

1

10

28

100

0

18

20

100

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Antenna in roof space

Internal portable (in addition to external antenna)

Satellite dish

External antenna

Per cent

Total

Bathurst

Orange

Others

Figure 4 Reported age of antennas—all antennas

CATI Q17a/Q17aa—Can you please tell me how old your external antenna is [All antennas]? (Base: All respondents: N=500)An estimate was sought from those not knowing the exact age of their antenna, with: four per cent saying between one and five years 18 per cent saying six to 10 years 15 per cent saying 11 to 20 years 10 per cent saying over 20 years.

19 | acma

52

7

4

17

4

7

0

4

2

0

2

2

2

18

13

10

14

13

4

6

8

3

5

4

4

5

17

13

9

13

13

6

6

5

5

4

9

4

4

20

13

9

14

12

5

5

6

4

4

6

4

4

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Don’t know

20+ years

16–20 years

11–15 years

10 years

8–9 years

6–7 years

5 years

4 years

3 years

2 years

One year

Less than one year

Per cent

Total

Bathurst

Orange

Others

The remainder (54 per cent of the 114 who did not know) could not provide even an estimate of antenna age.

Those respondents with two or more antennas (n=54) gave estimates of age of eight years (second antennas) to 13 years (third antennas) on average, suggesting that this average age is similar to the average of the main antenna. Second antennas were most often estimated as being one to five years old (n=16), six to 10 years old (n=15) or more than 11 years old (n=12), with only three said to be less than one year old.

Self-rated condition of antennas, compared with the audited finding, is shown in Figure 5 (for all antennas):

Figure 5 Self-reported and self-audited antenna condition

CATI Q17b—How would you rate the physical condition and appearance of the external antenna [All antennas]? (Base: All respondents: N=500); in-home Q3—Rate the condition of the external antenna (Base: All households: N=500)Most householders reported that their antennas were in at least fair condition, with only four per cent (23 of 500) rating them as poor. Another eight per cent could not say, although few reported anything but a good or fair antenna.

There was also no difference between analog and digital antennas based on self-reported status (that is, whether the householder said that they received analog or digital channels). Ratings for second and third antennas were similar.

Reported antenna condition by householders does not closely correlate with the views of auditors, even accepting the number of ‘don’t know’ responses. The auditors rated significantly more antennas as being in ‘fair’ condition, while fewer antennas were rated as ‘good’ compared to householders’ views. Overall, the difference in ‘poor’ ratings was only four per cent compared to six per cent. This finding implies that

acma | 20

householders often believe the condition of their antenna is better than it is. Table 8 summarises the results by location:

Table 8 Antenna condition ratings by location

Type Bathurst %(n=226)

Orange %(n=233)

Others %(n=41)

Total %(N=500)

Good:Household responseAuditor view

60

42

62

49

70

46

62

46Fair:


27

51

27

43

13

49

26

47Poor:


4

5

5

7

4

5

4

6Don’t know:


9

1

6

1

13

0

8

1Total 100 100 100 100

Results were similar by location, with the proportion of householders overstating the condition of their antenna system consistent across the regions.

Location of antennasMost existing antennas (97 per cent) were reported to be roof-mounted, with only 15 respondents saying that they had ground-mounted antennas (antenna/s fitted to a mast on the ground rather than attached to a building). However, the auditors found that 30 antennas (six per cent) were ground-mounted, with two-thirds of these in Bathurst (nine per cent of the Bathurst total).

Some respondents overestimated the height of the antenna mast, as shown in Figure 6. The audit found that 46 per cent were fewer than five metres from ground height, yet only 29 per cent of respondents estimated their antenna to be that height—a significant difference.

Overall, the data above are consistent with the installer comments that, since digital channels have been available, they have installed much shorter masts compared to the taller masts from many years ago (noting some installers had been working in the area for a long time. More short masts (those less than 5 metres from the ground to the top of the antenna) were found in Orange, being 54 per cent compared to 38 per cent, based on audit results; 33 per cent compared to 25 per cent based on respondent estimates. Note that the regional data in Figure 6 are audited results—a more reliable estimate.

21 | acma

Figure 6 Reported and audited mast heights

CATI Q19—What height is the external antenna from the ground to the top of the antenna [All antennas]? (Base: All respondents: N=500); in-homeQ6—What height is the antenna from the ground to the top of the antenna? (Base: All households: N=500)The audit also reported that 23 per cent had a masthead amplifier, with identification of amplifiers based on photos included in the auditors’ instructions. Close-up photos were also taken to better enable identification of these devices. The reported incidence of masthead amplifiers was significantly higher in Bathurst (29 per cent) than Orange (17 per cent) and, to some extent, in the other towns combined (24 per cent).

Use of a masthead amplifier was marginally correlated with antenna condition, with those rated by the technical review as excellent or good less likely to have a masthead amplifier (20 per cent) than those rated as fair or worse (26 per cent). However, based on technical evaluation, antennas fitted with a masthead amplifier were no older than those without such a device.

Type of antennas and installation processesTypes and installersAll respondents were asked what type of antenna they had. Those not giving a response (one-third overall) were prompted with a list of antenna types. It was found that prompting had marginal impact only; no type was mentioned by more than one per cent (on top of unprompted mentions). Results have therefore been amalgamated to include both the prompted and unprompted respondent data, together with the auditor’s assessments of the type of antenna. The regional data is based on audited results as they were individually checked by the auditors, with much fewer ‘don’t know’ responses. There were significant variations between the householder and auditor responses.

acma | 22

Table 9 shows how evaluations of antenna polarisation vary between the householder responses and the auditor evaluations. Results are shown separately for antennas directed at Mount Panorama and Mount Canobolas.

Table 9 Reported and audited antenna polarisation

Polarisation Mt Panorama % (n=186) Mt Canobolas % (n=309)Horizontal


42

8

24

13Vertical


10

70

5

20Horizontal/Vertical


11

3

28

58Other type


3

13

3

3Don’t know


33

5

39

6Total 100 100

CATI Q21b—Which of the following type of external antenna best describes yours? [All antennas] (Base: All respondents: n=495); in-homeQ9—Record type of antenna(Base: All households: n=495)Table 10 includes both audited and respondent descriptions of antenna bandwidths,2 by transmission source.

2 Respondents were not asked to observe their antenna, but provided their answer from memory.

23 | acma

Table 10 Reported and audited antenna bands

Bands Mt Panorama % (n=186) Mt Canobolas % (n=309)UHF


19

1

8

6VHF


4

14

2

5VHF/UHF


35

46

44

72Other type


8

34

6

12Don’t know


33

5

39

6Total 100 100

CATI Q21b—Which of the following type of external antenna best describes yours? [All antennas] (Base: All respondents: n=495); in-homeCATI Q9—Record type of antenna (Base: All households: n=495)The above data suggest the following: There were significant differences between the views of household respondents

about their antenna type and the views of the auditors, even accepting the number of ‘don’t know’ responses at household level.

Household respondents were far more likely to report horizontal polarisation for Mount Panorama while the auditors were far more likely to report the expected vertical polarisation for Mount Panorama.

Household respondents were more likely than the auditors to report ‘UHF only’ for Mount Panorama. Both methods of assessment gave combined VHF/UHF as the most common antenna type.

Household respondents were more likely than the auditors to report horizontal polarisation for Mount Canobolas while the auditors were more likely to report vertical polarisation or the expected horizontal/vertical polarisation for Mount Canobolas.

In the case of signals from Mount Canobolas, two analog channels (ABC and Prime) are vertically polarised; the remainder (other analog and all digital) are horizontal. Of the households with antennas directed towards Mount Canobolas, 20 per cent were vertical only, according to auditors, despite horizontal polarisation of all digital channels. For some households it is possible that the signal strength may be such that digital reception is not a problem even when the antenna is incorrectly polarised.

acma | 24

Table 11 shows how the more specific antenna types—in terms of combinations of bands and polarisation—were distributed by transmission source, for both the household and auditor data.3

Table 11 Reported and audited types of antenna by transmission source

Type Mt Panorama %(n=186)

Mt Canobolas % (n=309)

Combined vertical VHF, horizontal UHF


11

3

28

58Combined VHF/UHF—horizontal


160

132

Horizontal UHFHousehold responseAuditor view

191

86

Combined VHF/UHF—verticalHousehold responseAuditor view

842

311

Horizontal VHFHousehold responseAuditor view

44

22

Phased array—horizontalHousehold responseAuditor view

23

23

Phased array—verticalHousehold responseAuditor view

29

27

OtherHousehold responseAuditor view

233

26

Don’t knowHousehold responseAuditor view

335

396

Total 100 100

For Mount Panorama, auditors were far more likely to report combined VHF/UHF vertical antennas than were household respondents. According to the auditors, this was by far the most common type of antenna.

For Mount Canobolas,auditors were far more likely to report combined vertical VHF/horizontal UHF antennas, than were household respondents. Given this antenna type is ideally suited to receiving digital and analog signals from Mount Canobolas, it is likely that the householder self-classifications are less accurate. Later in this report, both views are compared with expert assessments to further examine this hypothesis.

3 Respondents were not asked to observe their antenna, but provided their answer from memory.

25 | acma

Figure 7 Reported and audited types of antenna

CATI Q21b—Which of the following type of external antenna best describes yours? [All antennas] (Base: All respondents: N=500); in-home Q9. Record type of antenna (Base: All households: N=500)Respondents were asked who had installed the antenna and if there were any (known) problems with this process. Figure 8 summarises the results. Of the half of respondents who did know who installed their antenna, roughly 50 per cent used specialist installers, with electricians playing a minor role. Based on the industry interviews, antenna suppliers either have their own installers or contract the work out. This means that when the ‘don’t know’ responses are excluded, about 60 per cent are likely to have had their antenna installed by a specialist or electrician,.

In Orange, home-owners were significantly more likely to install their own antenna; otherwise, regional variations were minor.

acma | 26

Figure 8 Who installed the main antenna

CATI Q21c—Who installed your [main] external antenna? (Base: All respondents: N=500)Respondents were asked to recall if their antenna was visible from the street (relevant for the street-level audits). It was found that: 36 per cent said it was clearly visible 16 per cent said it was partly visible eight per cent said it was not visible from the street or elsewhere 37 per cent said it was not visible from the street but visible elsewhere from ground

level.

There were minimal variations across the regions, although antennas at rural homesteads were less likely to be visible from the nearest public street (14 per cent).

27 | acma

Direction of the antennaWhen visiting the property, auditors checked the direction of the antenna/s relative to other properties, noting that for one in five (20 per cent), they could not make a judgment. This was higher in rural areas (59 per cent). The following observations were made: 77 per cent of antennas were found to be facing the same direction as those

neighbouring the property (91 per cent in detached houses compared to only 13 per cent in rural homesteads).

Only three per cent were not facing the same general direction, of which 10 of these (out of 14 in total) were in Bathurst.

All of the antennas that were not facing the same direction as neighbouring properties were digital—four per cent received a signal from Mount Panorama and two per cent from Mount Canobolas. It is not known what signal neighbouring households were receiving.

Number of television sets and their ageTelevision receiversThe residents of the Bathurst and Central Tablelands areas have a considerable number of television sets, with some respondent households having up to eight. The average number of television sets per household is 2.6. The distribution is shown in Table 12.

Table 12 Number of television sets used for free-to-air reception

Number of televisions:

Bathurst %(n=226)

Orange %(n=233)

Others %(n=41)

Total %(N=500)

One 23 18 27 21Two 38 33 29 35Three 21 28 29 25Four 11 13 10 12Five 5 4 2 5Six 2 2 0 2Seven or eight <1 2 2 1Total 100 100 100 100

CATI Q1a—How many televisions do you have in your household? (Base: All respondents: N=500)Overall, nearly eight in ten households had more than one television.

Figure 9 shows that 71 per cent of the installed base of main television sets was no more than five years old, suggesting new televisions have been purchased in recent years. Overall, only eight per cent had very old television sets (10 years or more) as their main set.

While the average age was less in Orange (with 74 per cent being no more than five years old), Orange had more very old television sets.

acma | 28

Figure 9 Main television age

CATI Q6—How old is your main television? (Base: All respondents: N=500)

Television channels receivedAs part of screening, respondents had to receive free-to-air television, either on its own or in combination with subscription TV. Of those receiving free-to-air television, 28 per cent overall also received satellite or cable, with similar numbers in Bathurst (28 per cent) and Orange (30 per cent), and 22 per cent in the three smaller towns. This incidence was lower than that estimated by installers—34 per cent in Orange and 41 per cent in Bathurst.

Of the 86 per cent of households that received any digital channel, nearly all got multiple channels. There were minor variations by location based on channels received, with digital services being marginally higher in Orange, but not significantly.

29 | acma

Figure 10 Digital channels received

CATI Q4—Which of the following free-to-air digital channels does your household currently receive? (Base: All respondents: N=500)The incidence of receiving any digital stations was 86 per cent of the total, with 14 per cent reporting receiving only analog channels. These households will need to upgrade their television equipment to receive digital free-to-air television broadcasts. The incidence of not receiving digital television was marginally lower in Orange (10 per cent) compared to Bathurst (15 per cent) and the other three towns combined (17 per cent), although these variations are not statistically significant.

Those not receiving any digital channels were viewing virtually all the main analog channels—all received Prime, 98 per cent received ABC, 95 per cent received SBS and 98 per cent received WIN.

Figure 11 summarises whether households reported that they were receiving cable/satellite/subscription television, free-to-air or both. No households reported receiving only cable/satellite/subscription television. The free-to-air-only incidence was higher in the smaller towns combined, noting that the small sample size (n=41) precludes statistical significance.

acma | 30

Figure 11 Television signals received

CATI Q2—Do you receive … only free-to-air TV, only cable, satellite or pay TV, or both? (Base: All respondents: N=500)Digital and analog equipmentThis section considers digital television equipment, as reported by respondents. While not a central objective of the project, measurement of equipment stock was determined to enable comparisons between the various research methods used in the project. Similar measures would suggest that the methods used are robust.

Based on views of householders, 83 per cent of the total television set-ups were digitally capable, being slightly (though not significantly) lower in Bathurst (80 per cent) compared to Orange (86 per cent). The other towns were near the regional total of 83 per cent.

31 | acma

78

22

70

30

72

28

72

28

0 20 40 60 80 100

Free-to-air only

Subscription and free-to-air

Per cent

Total

Bathurst

Orange

Others

Figure 12 Digital and other television equipment reported by households—main television

CATI Q7—Does your [main] TV have a built-in digital tuner? (Base: All respondents: N=500)CATI Q8(a)—Do you have a DVD recorder or other recording device connected to your [main] TV? (Base: All respondents: N=500)CATI Q8(b)—Do any of your recording devices[s] have a built in digital tuner? (Base: All respondents: N=500)CATI Q9—Do you view TV programs on your [main] TV through the recording device? (Base: All respondents: N=500)CATI Q10—Do you have a free-to-air digital set-top box connected to your [main] TV? (Base: All respondents: N=500)CATI Q12—All digital or all analog household? (Base: All respondents: N=500).The reported incidence of digital televisions (those with an in-built digital tuner) was significantly higher in Orange (55 per cent) compared to the other areas (including the minor towns). Orange also had a marginally higher incidence of hard disk recorders and, not surprisingly, a lower incidence of set-top boxes.

The in-home audits did not measure exactly the same variables for television equipment. However, it was found that, when data were comparable, some variations between the auditor reports and the respondent interviews emerged: The incidence of set-top boxes reported by household members was higher (37 per

cent) than the audited results (30 per cent), with the auditors finding fewer set-top boxes in all areas. However, the incidence of hard disk or other digital recorders

acma | 32

83

44

37

15

7

5

39

86

33

44

24

20

13

55

80

40

39

24

15

11

44

83

37

41

23

17

12

48

0 20 40 60 80 100

Total digital

Set-top box

Hard disk recorder

VCR

Recording device has digital tuner

View TV programs through recording device

Have TV with integrated digital

tuner

Per cent

Total

Bathurst

Orange

Others

was reported to be much higher than the audited results, suggesting that many householders did not know if their devices were digital and, in some cases, what type of device it was.

Overall, 41 per cent of householders said that they had a hard disk recorder, while the auditors found only 20 per cent had a digital DVD recorder or a PVR/hard disk drive recorder.

In contrast, the auditors found that most households had a DVD player without a digital receiver or recorder (69 per cent).

The in-home audits found the incidence of digital-capable television set-ups at 86 per cent was actually slightly higher than the 83 per cent reported by householders during the screening interviews. Some householders did not know if their equipment was digital or analog.

Figure 13 compares the two sources of data. The main variation was in Bathurst, where the incidence of any equipment capable of receiving digital signals was under-reported by respondents by five per cent.

Figure 13 Respondent view and in-home auditor view for digital capability

CATI Q12—All digital or all analog household? (Base: All respondents: N=500); in-homeQS2—Is it receiving digital or only analog? (Base: All tested: N=500)

Perceptions of reception quality and surrounding landscapeHouseholder ratingsFigure 14 summarises householder ratings of the overall level of reception quality. These data provide an overall perception of the picture quality and the rating is not based on whether the household receives digital or analog channels. The following points were found: Two-thirds (68 per cent) of householders rated their reception as good or excellent,

and only seven per cent as poor or bad.

33 | acma

83

86

80

83

83

87

85

86

76 78 80 82 84 86 88

Other area

Orange

Bathurst

Total

Per cent

Auditor

Household view

Variations between the areas were marginal; fewer in Bathurst rated reception as excellent but the difference was not statistically significant.

Distance from the transmission site played a small role in terms of perceived picture quality. For broadcasts from both transmission sites, there were marginal differences only based on distance.

Figure 14 Reported quality of overall reception

CATI Q24(a)—At the current time, how would you rate the overall TV reception quality you receive? (Base: All respondents: N=500)

Table 13 Reported reception quality by signal source


Mt Canobolas %(n=309)

Excellent 33 34Good 37 34Fair 22 20Poor 7 5Bad 1 2Varies across channels

1 5

Total 100 100

Figure 15 indicates that 26 per cent of respondents said they were living in an area with poor television reception, with those in the minor towns combined (46 per cent) and in Bathurst (32 per cent) significantly more likely to report that they were in a poor reception area than those in Orange (17 per cent). However, that finding is not exactly

acma | 34

12

2

7

20

22

37

3

2

4

20

34

36

1

0

7

23

38

30

3

1

6

21

35

33

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Varies across channels

Bad

Poor

Fair

Good

Excellent

Per cent

Total

Bathurst

Orange

Others

consistent with the reported quality of overall reception above, which found relatively minor variations only.

Residents of rural properties (based on both self-reported and audited data) also reported a higher incidence of being located in a poor reception area (46 per cent), which was again not shown in the overall ratings.

Figure 15 Perceptions of being in a poor reception area

CATI Q24(b)—Do you think that you live in an area with poor television reception coverage? (Base: All respondents: N=500)The perception of poor reception only led 27 per cent of respondents to ask an antenna specialist to check the problem. That incidence was not affected by antenna condition as observed by auditors.

Of the 14 respondents who said that an antenna specialist had checked the problem, most (n=9) said that the landscape (for example, hills, trees, slope) or the location was the cause. Only one pointed to the condition of the television and one to the distance from the transmitter site (Bathurst household). None stated that the problem was due to the condition of the antenna itself.

Audited performance of analog and digital channelsThe sound and picture quality of each analog and digital station was observed by auditors and rated in each household. Auditors used standards provided by technicians to rate sound and picture quality as excellent, good, fair, poor, bad or variable across channels. An overall rating of performance was also made by auditors using an agreed method as determined by technicians.

Results for the picture quality (based on those receiving analog transmission only) as well as an overall rating combining both sound and picture quality are in Table 14.

Table 14 Picture, sound and overall quality—analog TV-only households as rated by the auditor (n=70)

35 | acma

46

17

32

22

41

26

24

26

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Other areas

Orange

Bathurst

Detached house

Rural property

Digital reception

Analog reception

Total

Per cent

Quality rating ABC%

Prime %

SBS%

WIN%

Southern Cross/TEN %

Excellent:PictureAudioOverall

314036

303934

303934

243329

314036

Good:PictureAudioOverall

433740

514447

474141

494144

474344

Fair:Picture:AudioOverall

161416

111113

141317

171919

141114

Poor:Picture:AudioOverall

977

766

977

1079

766

Bad:PictureAudioOverall

111

000

000

000

000

Most of the households concerned received good or excellent analog reception, although there were a few variations: The quality of digital reception for both picture and sound was rated higher than

analog (see Table 14). Sound (audio) quality was consistently rated by the auditors as being better than

analog picture quality. Combined ‘excellent’ and ‘good’ ratings were between 73 and 81 per cent for the

picture quality for all channels, and between 74 and 83 per cent for audio quality. While variations between the channels was not great, WIN was less likely to be

rated as excellent compared to all other channels (however, the small sample size precludes significance). ABC was the only station to receive a ‘bad’ rating for either picture or audio quality.

When the ratings based on transmission site were compared (for analog signals) variations were minor. Overall, the picture, sound and overall quality was higher rated for analog signals from Mount Canobolas, although not significantly. By channel, differences were more evident for ABC, with those receiving signals from Mount Canobolas rated higher, but again not significantly.

The auditors then rated the quality of the digital picture, sound and overall quality for digital households (n=429). These ratings are summarised in Table 15.

acma | 36

Table 15 Picture, sound and overall quality—digital TV households as rated by the auditor (n=429)*

Rating of quality

ABC2%

Prime %

SBS2%

WIN%

Southern

Cross / TEN %

Excellent:PictureAudioOverall

747474

707070

757575

717171

747474

Good:PictureAudioOverall

201920

222222

201919

202020

191919

Fair:Picture:AudioOverall

555

666

444

666

555

Poor:Picture:AudioOverall

111

111

111

122

111

Bad:PictureAudioOverall

111

121

111

111

111

*The table is based on sample sizes of n=417 (SBS2) to n=429 (Prime)

The following comments can be made about digital reception quality: Compared to analog reception, digital reception quality was significantly and

consistently rated higher. All of those receiving digital channels were able to receive Prime. The other

channels ranged from 99.5 per cent (WIN) to 97.2 per cent (SBS2), meaning a small number of households were not able to receive all channels.

Unlike for analog reception, auditors rated both digital sound and picture quality equivalently across all channels.

Only one to two per cent of the audits rated either picture or sound quality as ‘poor’ or ‘bad’, with minimal differences between the channels.

There were only marginal differences between the areas. Digital reception quality in Blayney (n=18) was less favourably rated, although the sample size was very small.

There were no significant variations between households receiving a signal from Mount Panorama or Mount Canobolas. Although not significant, auditors gave a higher proportion of ‘Excellent—there are no problems with picture or sound’ ratings overall for signals received from Mount Panorama. This pattern was consistent across the channels

Connections and wallplatesRespondents had difficulty categorising the type of cable connecting their (main) antenna. Of the total, 37 per cent reported having a coaxial cable, 27 per cent said it

37 | acma

was another type, and the remaining 36 per cent could not say (no one said it was a ribbon cable). Respondents were then prompted by a short description of each type of cable, showing that: 78 per cent were coaxial cables only two per cent reported ribbon cables, of which six (of nine in total) were in

Bathurst a further 20 per cent still did not know.

The auditors confirmed that the vast majority of cables were coaxial, as householders had stated: 98 per cent of cables were coaxial one per cent were ribbon cables (two in Bathurst and one in Orange) the remaining one per cent could not be determined.

Figure 16 summarises the auditors’ visual assessment of the condition of external antenna connection systems (cables and connectors). The results show that: Three in 10 external antenna connections were described as being in good

condition, but this was less so in the smaller towns (17 per cent). Half of external antenna connections were rated as fair, indicating some obvious

wear and tear. Only four per cent of external antenna connections were rated as poor, with

obvious wear and tear or evidence of damage. There were only marginal differences in the condition of external antenna

connections between the major towns of Orange and Bathurst.

Good external connections were significantly more likely in dwellings with adequate digital reception, suggesting that this might be a contributing factor.

Figure 16 Audited connection condition

acma | 38

In-home Q12—Rate the condition of the connection/s to the antenna (Base: All households: N=500)The auditors also checked the condition (completeness, defects) of the internal wallplate where the connection is made between the cable from the antenna and the fly lead to the television. The scale used was as follows: good—it looks new or almost new, minimal damage or wear is visible fair—some obvious wear and tear from age but otherwise okay poor—there is clear evidence of wear and tear and/or damage don’t know.

The condition of the wallplate as rated by the auditors is shown in Figure 17.

Figure 17 Audited wallplate condition

In-home Q23—Rate the condition of the wallplate (Base: All households: N=500)Wallplate condition overall was variable, with equal numbers rated as ‘good’ and ‘fair’, while six per cent were rated as ‘poor’. Significantly more were rated as poor in Bathurst (nine per cent) than in Orange (three per cent) and the minor towns combined (two per cent).

Households receiving digital signals from Mount Panorama were more likely to have a wallplate in poor condition (10 per cent) than in all other households (four per cent).

39 | acma

Variables that can be determined from street level auditingThis section outlines the types of data that can be observed at street level, without entering the property. The street-level observations were conducted by the in-home auditors to determine what variables can be observed from the street. Figure 18 summarises the proportion of the 10 variables that can be reasonably observed from the street in the three locations.

Figure 18 Variables observable at street level

Street-level observation QS3—Which of the following can you easily determine from the street level outside the dwelling? (Base: All households: N=500)Figure 18 indicates that, with the exception of the antenna brand and model (32 per cent), 60 to 64 per cent of observations for each variable can be made from street level.

acma | 40

34

41

41

39

39

24

39

39

41

41

62

65

65

64

63

37

64

64

65

65

68

67

66

61

60

27

63

63

65

68

62

64

64

60

60

32

62

62

63

64

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Neighbouring antennas face same direction

Direction antenna is facing

Buildings or other obstacles that may affect reception

Antenna problems/faults

Antenna cables

Antenna brand/model

Antenna condition

Antenna age

Antenna type

If antenna is shared

Per cent

Bathurst

Total

Orange

Others

Auditors found it considerably harder to observe antennas at street level in the three minor towns of Blayney, Millthorpe and Molong. The incidence of observable variables in these towns ranged from 24 per cent to 41 per cent, with most at the higher end. This was because the distance of the buildings from the road and the presence of trees on land surrounding rural homesteads made it difficult to observe these variables for many properties.

41 | acma

Summary of technical assessmentsThis section summarises the ratings and assessments about the performance and condition of antennas and television equipment given by technical staff.

Antenna coverageTables 16, 17 and 18 summarise the best judgment of technicians in determining the types of main antennas by source of the signal and the polarisation.

In the case of signals from Mount Canobolas, two analog channels (ABC and Prime) are vertically polarised VHF, while the remainder (other analog and all digital) are horizontally polarised UHF. All channels from Mount Panorama are vertically polarised, with all digital channels and two analog channels (ABC and Prime) VHF. The other three analog channels are UHF (SBS, Southern Cross TEN, WIN).

The following points are noted: Consistent with all digital signals from Mount Panorama being vertically polarised

VHF Band III, 74 per cent of antennas directed at this transmission source had VHF capability and 94 per cent were vertically polarised. Seventy-three per cent of antennas included vertically polarised VHF elements. The most common antenna type was vertically polarised VHF/UHF (39 per cent), followed by vertical VHF only (32 per cent). However, 22 per cent of antennas were vertical UHF only, four per cent were UHF only and one per cent were VHF but horizontally polarised only.

For analog signals from Mount Panorama, antennas would be expected to be vertical and combination VHF/UHF. However, only 41 per cent of all antennas fell into this category, with the majority of others being vertical but VHF only (32 per cent), consistent with ABC and Prime, or vertical and UHF only (22 per cent), consistent with the other channels.

Consistent with all digital signals from Mount Canobolas being horizontally polarised UHF, 82 per cent of all antennas directed at this transmission source had UHF capability and 79 per cent were horizontally polarised. Seventy-eight per cent of antennas had horizontally polarised UHF elements. The most common type was vertical/horizontal VHF/UHF (45 per cent), followed by horizontally polarised UHF only (27 per cent) and horizontal VHF/UHF (six per cent). However, 18 per cent of all antennas were vertically polarised VHF only.

For analog signals from Mount Canobolas, antennas would be expected to be vertical/horizontal VHF/UHF. However, only 45 per cent of all antennas were in this category. Sixty-four per cent of antennas had vertical VHF elements, as needed for ABC and Prime, while 78 per cent of all antennas had horizontal UHF capability, as needed for the other channels.

Based on the analysis above, 43 per cent of antennas were of the bandwidth and polarisation required for full analog and digital capability, with 76 per cent of antennas being suited to digital reception across both regions.

acma | 42

Table 16 Antenna bandwidth by signal source

Bands Mt Panorama % (n=183)


UHF only 26 29VHF only 32 18VHF/UHF 42 53Total 100 100

Note: measurements could not be obtained for n=14 households

Table 17 Antenna polarisation by signal source

Polarisation Mt Panorama % (n=183)


Horizontal 5 34Vertical 93 21Vertical/horizontal 1 45Total 100 100

Table 18 Antenna polarisation and bandwidth by signal source

Polarity BandsMt Panorama % (n=183)


Horizontal UHF only 4 27Horizontal VHF only 0 1Horizontal VHF/UHF 1 6Vertical UHF only 22 2Vertical VHF only 32 18Vertical VHF/UHF 39 1Vertical/horizontal VHF/UHF 2 45Total 100 100

Antenna ageFigure 19 summarises technical evaluations of antenna age, and compares these to householder estimates. The regional data (Bathurst, Orange and the minor towns combined) is based on technical evaluations.

43 | acma

Figure 19 Comparative antenna age—all antennas

CATI Q17a/Q17aa—Can you please tell me how old your external antenna is [All antennas]? (Base: All respondents: N=500)Technical assessment: Age of all antennas (Base: All determined: N=500)For the technical assessments, no main antenna was estimated to be less than one year old. However, four per cent of householders stated that their main antenna was less than one year old, while 25 per cent said one to five years. The data above have therefore been aggregated for householder results to show 29 per cent for up to and including five years.

Even accounting for the number of ‘don’t know’ response from householders, there are clear differences between the technical evaluations of age of antennas and the estimates given by respondents. The technical evaluations suggest that 46 per cent are up to five years old, but only 29 per cent of respondents gave that estimate.

Further, the technical evaluations indicated that only seven per cent of the antennas are 15 years old or more, yet around three in 10 respondents said their antenna was at least 15 years old, allowing for the many householders who could not give an estimate.

Overall, it appears that estimating antenna age is not easy for either technicians or householders, noting that none of the antennas were estimated to be 11 to 15 years old by the technicians. In this case it is not possible to say which estimates are more

acma | 44

‘correct’; rather, there are significant variations between the two estimates, suggesting caution is needed in using either data set.

These inconsistencies affect the appropriate choice of methodology to determine antenna condition and performance, as age is related to condition. The age of the antenna may, however, help predict the type of antenna in use at an overall level (for example, pre-aggregation, post digital).

Expert assessments of observed antenna conditionThe technical assessment of antenna condition provided the following results, based on a five-point scale. This includes ‘excellent’ and ‘very poor’, although the end points of the scale were rarely used.

The scale used was as follows: excellent—looks new with no wear or damage good—looks new or almost new, minimal damage or wear is visible fair—some obvious wear and tear from age but otherwise okay poor—clear evidence of wear and tear, corrosion or damage very poor—unusable, badly damaged or broken.

Figure 20 Expert opinion—antenna condition (all antennas)

Technical assessment(Base: All observed antennas: n=492)Only a small proportion of antennas (four per cent) were rated as ‘poor’ (and only one was rated as ‘very poor’). The incidence of antennas given a ‘poor’ rating was higher in the minor towns (10 per cent) compared to either Bathurst or Orange.

45 | acma

Figure 20 shows that: Overall, the technical evaluations suggest that antenna condition was very similar

in Bathurst and Orange. The household responses were also closer to the technical evaluations than were the auditor ratings. However, that was not the case in the minor towns, where householders were more likely to give positive antenna condition ratings than technicians.

The auditors rated more antennas as being in poor condition than the technicians (six per cent compared to three per cent) although, overall, the distribution of ratings was similar. This is a significant difference, and suggests that the auditors applied the criteria more stringently than did the technicians, leading to an overestimation of poor antennas.

All methods give similar ratings when ‘poor’ is the variable in question, although all methods would appear to be suitable in assessing condition, accepting that many householders could not rate them.

Technical antenna ratings by region Technicians rated antenna suitability for digital and analog reception as ‘adequate’, ‘marginal’ or ‘inadequate’. This was an overall evaluation of all main antennas, and was based on signal strength measurements taken by the auditor within the property.4 The results are summarised below and in Table 19: Only seven per cent of domestic antennas in the area were assessed as being

inadequate for digital reception. This assessment was significantly higher in the minor towns and in rural

homesteads, with 20 per cent of dwellings in these towns or dwelling types being rated as inadequate. Suitability of antennas for analog reception was also significantly lower in the minor towns.

There was minimal difference between Orange and Bathurst, although suitability of antenna systems for analog reception was significantly better in Orange.

Overall, more antennas were rated as inadequate for analog than for digital, with assessed digital ‘adequacy’ being better overall than for analog. This is an important finding as it suggests that when analog broadcasts cease, there will not be widespread problems with reception. However, it does suggest that the outlying towns of Millthorpe, Blayney and Molong may not be as well off, both relative to analog reception and compared to the two major towns. This is partly because they are further away from the transmission source.The results are summarised by signal type and source in Table 19.

4 Ratings were determined according to the following:For digital (reference AS1367:2007 Table 9.3).Digital rule for assessing individual antenna:IF all channels have MER in the antenna coverage >=25 dB THEN digital reception for the antenna=‘Adequate’IF some channels have MER in the antenna coverage<=25 dBTHEN digital reception for the antenna=‘Marginal’IF all channels have MER in the antenna coverage<25 dBTHEN digital reception for the antenna=‘Inadequate’.For analog (reference AS1367:2007 Table 8.3).Analog rule for assessing individual antenna:IF all channels have signal level within the frequency range of the antenna >= 60 dBµV THEN analog reception=‘Adequate’IF some channels have signal level in the antenna coverage <= 60 dBµV but >= 45 dBµV THEN analog reception=‘Marginal’IF all channels have signal level in the antenna coverage < 45 dBµV THEN analog reception=‘Inadequate’.

acma | 46

Table 19 Adequacy of television reception by signal source


Mt Canobolas %(n=309)

Total %(n=495)

Digital rating:AdequateMarginalInadequateNot rated

761545

731782

741673

Analog rating:AdequateMarginalInadequateNot rated

661978

6717133

6718106

Table 19 shows that digital reception was similar for both sites, accepting the number of not rated households receiving signals from Mount Panorama. For analog signals, reception was also similar for both sites, although the proportion of ‘adequate’ ratings was slightly lower than for digital.

47 | acma

MappingSuitability of antenna systems for analog receptionBased on the technical assessments, maps were created to depict the suitability of antennas for both digital and analog reception. These maps are intended to provide a visual aid for interpreting the findings on suitability for analog and digital reception. The assessments were made from photographs and survey evidence of all antennas, with technicians rating antennas as being adequate, marginal or inadequate.

This figure depicts households that receive analog reception (n=70), and show technical ratings of the adequacy of antennas for this purpose.

Figure 21 Analog users—adequacy of antennas for analog reception

acma | 48

Suitability of antenna systems for digital reception—households receiving analog channelsFigure 22 shows the expected performance of antennas for digital signals in households that are presently receiving only analog signals (n=70). This shows potential rather than actual adequacy.

Figure 22 Analog-only households—adequacy of antennas for digital reception

49 | acma

Figure 23 shows potential adequacy of antennas in analog-only households for digital signals, focusing on the Bathurst area.

Figure 23 Analog-only households—adequacy of antennas for digital signals, Bathurst area

acma | 50

Figure 24 shows the potential adequacy of antennas in analog-only households for digital signals, focusing on the Orange (Central Tablelands) area.

Figure 24 Analog-only households—adequacy of antennas for digital signals, Central Tablelands

51 | acma

Suitability of antenna systems for digital reception—those currently receiving digital signalsFigure 25 shows the rated adequacy of the antenna for digital signals where the household is receiving digital signals. Both regions (Bathurst and Central Tablelands) are depicted.

Figure 25 Digital households—adequacy of antennas, both regions

acma | 52

Figure 26 shows the rated adequacy of antennas for digital signals where the household is receiving digital signals. This map focuses on the Bathurst region.

Figure 26 Digital households—adequacy of antennas, Bathurst region

53 | acma

Figure 27 shows rated antenna adequacy for digital signals where the household is receiving digital signals. This map focuses on the Orange (Central Tablelands) region.

Figure 27 Digital households—adequacy of antennas, Central Tablelands

acma | 54

Industry researchThis section summarises the findings from interviews with television station field and operations personnel, antenna suppliers, installers and antenna manufacturers. The manufacturers (n=2) have been included in the installer/supplier results due to the small number involved. The television station personnel comments are reported separately.

Antenna installers, suppliers and manufacturersOverview of the installers and industry structureEleven installers (including one who was also a major local supplier), one importer and one manufacturer were interviewed. Of the 12 local interviews, six each were conducted in Orange and Bathurst. This represents virtually the total number of the antenna installers in the area, with one in Bathurst refusing. Some installers did not handle satellite dishes, and installers advised that these were sometimes installed in batches by non-local contractors.

A few installers were approaching retirement or now only worked part-time (one was in his seventies, two in their sixties), and none was a recent entrant to the industry, despite the volume of work evident with upgrades for digital television.

The average number of years that installers had been in the business was 28 years, with the range being from five to 50 years, suggesting a mature industry. While some installers employed younger people, more than half worked on their own. Most of the others employed one or two people, often on a part-time or contract basis. The largest business was a well-established Orange-based company (which covered a broad footprint), with nine employees and a wholesale and retail business. The next largest was a regional distributor of antenna products, which had its main office at Parkes (field sales staff distributed the products to Orange installers).

Of the 12 local organisations: three were wholesalers, two of whom also installed antennas two had a retail presence (although wholesaling was the main business in both

cases) most got direct work, with some also accepting sub-contract work from builders or

other contractors most smaller players were sole traders, with the rest being private companies one installer only covered Orange, with four covering Bathurst only. The other

installers indicated that they accepted work from anywhere, often working in other nearby towns and regions—for example, from the Blue Mountains to Bathurst, or Lithgow to Wellington. Typically, towns surrounding either Bathurst or Orange were covered as well as the suburban areas of Bathurst and Orange.

The industry structure can be described as follows: There are two major Australian manufacturers of television antennas—Hills

Antennas (which has numerous sub-brands) and Matchmaster (often branded as Digimatch). Both make a wide range of models. It was apparent that both were commonly used in Bathurst and Orange, although Hills products were the most commonly installed at the time of interviewing the installers.

Fracarro, an Italian brand primarily distributed by Laceys TV, was quite popular in Orange in particular, with one installer directly importing them in small numbers.

55 | acma

One major distributor in the region sold SignalMAX antennas, which were copies of major Australian brands such as Hills and Matchmaster.

A few minor brands were also evident—for example, AIMCO/PhaseLink and Topline (formerly part of DJ Coulter, which brands imported products that are similar to local ones), and JC, a British company that was mentioned only once in the interviews.

Distribution to the trade is through electrical suppliers such as Lacey’s, DJ Coulter, Rural Electronics and TLE, some of which also supply retail customers.

Consumers were able to purchase antennas from traditional hardware and electronics suppliers, as well as some general retailers that sell televisions and set-top boxes. With such equipment generally self-installed, the installers will often not install them or else rarely get asked to.

Specialisation and types of antennas usedInstallers do not specialise in any type of antennas; all will install whatever type they think is needed. A few comments were: ‘I’ve got to use all of them ... as Orange is UHF and Bathurst VHF, and analog is

both, I do everything.’ ‘I do everything ... CB [radios], build some myself, all types, whatever is needed.’

The second respondent above made some of his own antennas, including recycling parts from old antennas, although other installers saw that as a waste of time given their cost.

Table 20 summarises the antennas installed by respondents, with the ‘range’ being the highest and lowest estimate of the proportion of each type they install. Only two performed roof cavity installations, and such installations accounted for only one or two per cent of the total. External antennas mounted on the roof accounted for 89 per cent of installations, and at least half of the installations conducted by any installer.

Satellite dishes accounted for around eight per cent of the total antenna systems installed, although a few did not handle them at all, and satellite dish installations were a small part of the workload of most others. One said that satellite dishes represented half their work, although that individual had a contract with Austar. Others installed satellites for Aurora or occasionally for Austar.

Table 20 Types of antenna installed

Type Installed last year—range

Average Expected next year—range

Expected average

External antennas located in the roof cavity Two said 1–2% <1% One said 2% <1%

External antennas that are mounted on a mast on the roof 50–98% 89% 50–98% 90%

External antennas that are fitted to a mast mounted on the ground

Two-thirds installed—range of 1–10% 2.5% Two-thirds installed

—range of 1–10% 2.5%

Satellite dishes 80% install them, range of 1–50% 8% 80% install them,

range of 1–50% 7.5%

acma | 56

Overall, the domestic market is dominated by roof-mounted antennas: External roof-mounted antennas account for 90 per cent of all installations. The

range was 90 to 98 per cent for all but one respondent, who installed satellite dishes for Austar on contract.

There is little or no expected change in the incidence of antenna types; the marginal variations above amount to no more than a handful of antennas.

No installers handle rabbit ear-type antennas. Some installers said that they are either useless or that customers would install them themselves.

Only two had ever installed antennas in the roof space, and some seemed rather incredulous that anyone would do so.

Antennas fitted to a mast mounted on the ground were uncommon, but installers reported them in use in outlying areas, with the antennas sometimes being in a paddock away from the dwelling. Such antennas were said to be installed in areas where an adequate signal could not be found on the roof of the building.

Between them, the eleven installers installed approximately 2,650 antennas a year, although the range was from 50 to 800 per year per installer, with two installers (one each in Bathurst and Orange) accounting for more than half (1,400) between them a year. Those handling lesser numbers tended to either be in semi-retirement or else antenna installation was only part of their work—for example, general electricians and those installing other communication equipment such as CB radios.

The reported annual number of satellite installations was 220, which is around eight per cent of the total. As noted with all antennas, two respondents accounted for most of them, some installed only a few a year and a handful did not install satellite dishes at all.

57 | acma

Antenna brands and types or models installed

Table 21 Antenna models commonly installed in Bathurst and Orange

Brands Models/types Cost Installation Bands Multi or wide band

Handmade (n=1 installer)

YAGI 100–250 300 UHF Wide

Hills (n=8) CA 16 Phased arrayDY6 VHFPU16 (for paddocks)YAGIYAGI Y10 ir Y14SMX combinationSFX91 UHFOMX OptimaxMini HunterPhased array

90–12030–9028045–6565–1004575–801356565

300–400250–400600290–350200+290250–300260+260+200+

VHFVHFBothUHFVHFBothUHFUHFUHFUHF

WideWideMultiWideWideMultiWideWideWideWide

Matchmaster (n=3) YAGI + WISIWISI EE06Phased array

90–12012028–40

280–300350–400300

UHFUHFBoth

WideWideMulti

JC (n=1) Phased array 60 300 UHF LimitedTopline (n=1) Phased array 60 300 UHF LimitedPhaselink (n=1) Phased array 35–40

wholesale; 80 retail

300 UHF Wide

Fracarro (n=6) CombinedLog periodicPhased arrayPhased arrayLP345YAGI 20 element

2009045–60604585

300260–310250–310200250–300260–310

BothUHFUHFUHFBothBoth

MultiWideWideWideMultiMulti

SignalMAX (n=2) Phased array 30–100 250–320 UHF Wide

The descriptions of models included both detailed product numbers and generic descriptions (for example, phased array, YAGI, combo), with phased array being more popular in Orange than in other areas.

Installers were also asked about how they select antennas, the best types for use in the area they cover and their preferred brands. In addition, installers were asked whether the move to digital television meant increased enquiries from householders about antenna systems. The following points provide additional context to the reported results: Installers select antennas based on what is suitable for the area, what is proven

and reliable, and what is affordable for the customer. However, some installers recommend and install different types of antennas in the one area, based on what they have found to work in the past—and this may not always be appropriate. In short, they appear to learn by trial and error, and stick to what they know.

An observation in Bathurst was that while the digital signal is VHF Band III, some installers are currently using UHF antennas. Of the six Bathurst-based installers, only four installed any VHF models. Some also used combination antennas (both UHF and VHF); although a few installers and television station staff argued that combination antennas can have interference problems. This suggests that

acma | 58

information for installers about what antenna type is best suited to each region may be useful.5,6

There were differing views among the installers about what type/s best suit any area. Antenna preferences therefore varied even within one area and for the same signal type.

The manufacturer representative had a quite different point of view, stating that YAGI and UHF antennas were suitable for Bathurst and Orange, but warning against log periodic antennas, whose performance was ‘okay’ but not better. However, one installer said that log periodic antennas perform better than other types.

A few installers use one brand only—two Orange-based installers only use SignalMAX due to good relationships with the supplier and one each only use Matchmaster or Hills. Of the remainder, two mainly use Hills, while Fracarro antennas are very popular with some. Most brands are seen as comparable in quality.

A few other brands were used by one installer each, with one Bathurst-based installer accounting for two of these (JC and Topline) and one in Orange, who installed Phaselink among other brands.

There was general acceptance that the move to digital television has led to more enquiries and more work, as customers upgrade their television equipment, and either find that the reception is poor or they want to improve the picture quality given their investment in the television. Some asserted that customers will ‘put up with poor analog performance, not digital’ or that when they get a snowy image with analog, they are likely to get a pixellated image with digital, as well as limited channels or none at all. A few installers also mentioned that some customers do not recognise that the antenna is the source of poor reception until they upgrade to digital.

Installation prices were typically in the range of $250 to $350 for most installers, including the connections, cables and electronics needed (if they are not already included with the antenna). The lowest price quoted was $200+, the plus sign meaning that it would be for a very simple installation requiring minimal work on the installer’s part. It was also evident that those quoting lower prices for installations typically charged a higher mark-up for the antenna itself. This gives some indication of the cost involved in upgrading antennas.

All installers said that 100 per cent of the antennas they were currently installing suited digital transmission, although some antennas were chosen based on the need for analog reception as well (for example, combination antennas for both VHF/UHF signals).

The manufacturer and importers felt that most of the new antennas being installed would give reasonable reception in both Bathurst and Orange, even the cheaper ones on sale at hardware stores. However, outlying areas (outside the main signal areas) would require higher gain and more specific types of antenna.

Reasons for installationOf the total installations of antennas, one-third involved replacing existing antennas and the other two-thirds were new installations. Of those replaced, it was apparent that:

5 The mySwitch website, which has been launched since this study was completed, provides technical information about digital television broadcasts for a specific address, including channel frequencies, antenna polarisation, the transmission source and predicted coverage. See http://myswitch.digitalready.gov.au . 6 As part of the government’s quality assurance measures, an Antenna Installer Endorsement Scheme also operates to ensure consumers have access to skilled and endorsed antenna installers.

59 | acma

http://myswitch.digitalready.gov.au/

nearly all were removed and scrapped or recycled as waste a few were left on the roof, with the occasional old analog antenna being left next to

a new digital antenna one installer would repair them and re-use them, or else re-use some parts of

them.

There were a handful of reasons for antenna replacement: poor reception quality from the existing antenna, mentioned by all installers. Some

said that they occasionally replaced cheap and unsuitable antennas that had been installed by a tenant or a handyman

interference, mentioned by a few installers only upgrading television equipment, with customers wanting better performance now

that they had purchased new equipment switching to digital television was the most frequently mentioned reason, with some

finding that their new television could not receive acceptable digital signals using the existing antenna. Some also stated that customers wanted and expected a better picture with their new television

damage or breakages, typically the result of birds, weather, lightning or old age.

In nearly all cases, the installer selected the antenna based on their knowledge of the area and experience, although occasionally they would install one purchased by the customer. In a few cases, they advised the customer that the antenna they had already purchased was unsuitable, although that was uncommon. Installers were quick to point out that they did not like this arrangement and would not accept responsibility for the performance of the antenna.

Installers believed that a lot of the antenna stock, particularly in Bathurst, was very old and had reached or passed its normal life span: In Bathurst, which has more old antennas due to the age of the town, many

antennas were reported to be 30–40 years old. The average age was very hard for installers to determine. Some could not offer an

opinion because they only see the ones that need replacing, although a few suggested that the average age was around 15–20 years.

In Orange, where aggregation (regional equalisation of television channels) in the 1990s led to some upgrading, the oldest antennas were estimated at 20–30 years old. The average age was estimated at 10–15 years, with more new antennas in the area.

Assumed life expectancy of antennas was seen as varying considerably. The better quality brands and models should last 15–20 years (sometimes longer), although the connections and electrical components (not mechanical) generally deteriorate first, unless the antenna itself is damaged.

Some commented that better quality antennas should be ‘trouble-free’ for 15 years and then progressively deteriorate, meaning the ‘real’ life expectancy depends on the definition used. They can still work after 30 years, although performance would progressively deteriorate.

Cheaper models, such as recent imports that are copies of local models, and those with lots of plastic components, were estimated to last 5–10 years. As these models are relatively new to the market, this was an expectation rather than an estimate based on empirical knowledge.

Repair of antennasInstallers reported that they repaired or modified a considerable proportion of antennas, including changing electronics or moving the antenna. About 30 per cent of

acma | 60

their work is repairs rather than new installations; however, the metal components themselves are rarely repaired. Only one installer thought this was worthwhile, with others arguing that the cost of the antenna makes repair uneconomical. Unless an antenna is simply bent due to storm damage and is otherwise in good condition, most would replace it.

Frequency of replacement or repair of components is shown in Table 22.

Table 22 Frequency of replacement or repair of components

Component Percentage of all repairs (average for all installers)

Number per month (based on all installers)

Replace cable 30 Approximately 60

Install taller mast 5 10

Move the antenna 25 50

Fit or replace masthead amplifier

20 40

Replace baluns and other repairs

20 40

The installation of a taller mast is an occasional repair only (one installer commented that it occurred mainly in country areas) and some installers commented that it was more common to fit shorter rather than longer mastheads.

Installers reported that old antennas are often taller than those currently being installed: The height of existing antenna masts range from one metre upwards (those in town

centres are typically 1–1.5 metres), while older antennas, often installed decades ago, are up to 15 metres.

The tallest masts are typically located in and around Bathurst, although even in Orange (especially the areas outside town), very tall antennas (8–10 metres) are common.

The trend now is for most antenna masts to be 1–1.5 metres, with some installers saying that most now are no more than one metre. Some antennas in outlying areas are 2.5–3 metres above roof height but city antennas are typically only 1–1.5 metres above roof height.

When masts are replaced on existing antennas, some of the taller masts are seen as unnecessary and are replaced with shorter ones.

Antenna stock, television equipment and reported issuesTo determine the extent to which installer estimates can be relied on when compared to householder-reported stock and auditor observation, installers were asked about the adequacy of existing antennas for digital broadcasts.

The ranges and average (mean) scores from installers are listed in Table 23, with the results indicating that: Approximately one in seven households in Bathurst, and one in 10 in Orange, were

estimated to have no digital television equipment (this figure is higher than the seven per cent expert opinion suggested).

61 | acma

Bathurst was perceived to have a higher proportion of households without digital capability, based on its antennas. This matched comments from installers that the signal is less powerful from Mount Panorama than Mount Canobolas, and households receiving signals from that site are more likely to have problems after the analog network is switched off. However, expert opinion suggested that the real difference between the two regions was minor (five per cent in Orange, six per cent in Bathurst).

Table 23 Equipment stock in Bathurst and Orange

Item* % in Bathurst % in Orange

Digital TV Range of 30–75Average of 60

Range of 43–65Average of 51

Analog TV with set-top box Range of 15–40Average of 30


Analog TV with PVR/DVD recorder



No digital capability Range of 5–40Average of 17


Pay TV Range of 33–60Average of 41


*Note: Multiples accepted for equipment as a household can have more than one type.

When the much higher estimate of no digital capacity made by one installer in Bathurst is removed, the incidence in Bathurst would be around 11 per cent. The Orange average would be seven per cent if the highest estimate was eliminated.

The installers’ estimates of adequate, marginal and inadequate antennas for digital signals are in Table 24.

Table 24 Current antenna stock in Bathurst and Orange—installers’ estimates of digital reception

Item % in Bathurst % in Orange

Adequate reception Range of 50–85Average of 72


Marginal reception (some ability) Range of 10–30Average of 16


Inadequate reception (no effective digital reception)



Overall, the estimates for both Bathurst and Orange were similar, with the difference being one relatively low estimate of antennas with inadequate digital reception in Bathurst (five per cent). All other estimates of inadequate reception were in the range of 10 to 20 per cent, and the average estimates for both adequate and marginal digital reception were equivalent for Bathurst and Orange.

acma | 62

Orange was seen as being likely to have a slightly higher proportion on average of households with inadequate digital reception although, according to the estimates, Orange and Bathurst are equivalent.

One caveat was applied by some installers, suppliers and the manufacturer. In some cases, the antenna itself may be suitable for digital reception but an amplifier may have been installed for analog that is not suitable for digital signals due to lower power levels required for digital signals, or that other components (baluns, connections, cables) may be less effective with digital signals. Some examples were provided where the decibel level of existing amplifiers was found to be too high for digital signals.

Television station personnelComments were obtained from five television station field and operations personnel. These interviews were conducted to determine if television station personnel can adequately describe the antenna stock in the two regions.

While a discussion guide was used, the interviews were relatively unstructured and free-flowing, partly as the spokespeople’s’ jobs involved coverage of a wide geographic area rather than focusing on the Bathurst and Orange regions, and they sometimes found it hard to be specific in terms of local issues and circumstances.

Reception quality—Bathurst and Central TablelandsThe interviews began by asking the respondents’ views of reception quality in Bathurst and then Orange. Views on antenna stock and antenna adequacy were sought later.

Station personnel considered that reception quality in this region was good compared to most other regional areas in NSW and Australia. Orange was seen as better overall.

Reception in the suburbs and towns outside the metropolitan areas of Bathurst and Orange, especially those outside the main transmission footprint, was seen as problematic by some respondents.

A few comments about the areas were as follows: The signal was quite variable throughout different times of day and in different

seasons. A few respondents said the design and height of antennas in Bathurst are

problematic. The populated areas of Bathurst have expanded since the transmitter site was

built. The site was never designed to transmit to the newer, outlying areas, and was ‘only designed to cover the town’.

The location of the Mount Panorama transmitter site is not ideal, with hilly terrain limiting reception in several parts of Bathurst.

Reception in Bathurst can ‘vary considerably’. The same respondent also suggested that many reported problems with reception were due to the ‘receive system’ (the antenna and television) rather than the signal itself.

The signal from Mount Canobolas is more powerful than that from Mount Panorama. It is likened to a ‘parent and child’ relationship, with the UHF signal from Mount Canobolas re-transmitted in VHF form from Mount Panorama. Few complaints were received from viewers of the Mount Canobolas service (other than from viewers with poor or faulty equipment or experiencing the occasional breakdown in the signal from the transmitter).

The Central Tablelands region is considered to be not only better than Bathurst but also one of the better regions in Australia for signals. While Bathurst has ‘a few

63 | acma

problems’, the transmission from Mount Canobolas is seen as a ‘great service’, with ‘very few complaints’. One respondent commented that they ‘only get complaints from Bathurst’.

Antenna condition, age and performanceSome broadcaster representatives were reluctant to comment on the condition and adequacy of antennas in the areas concerned due to a lack of first-hand knowledge. However, there was a general view that many antennas—not just in Bathurst and Orange but elsewhere—are ‘not good’ and, as a result, the switch-off of the analog signal will leave some with no signal or a very poor signal.

Television station personnel claimed that many connections and cables are often in poor condition due to their age; without upgrading them, viewers may not receive all channels. Two respondents also noted that amplifiers were an issue, with the digital signals sometimes needing attenuation or even removal of the amplifier to reduce the signal gain. Two commented that, in Bathurst in particular, ribbon cables are still common; these will often not work well with digital transmission as they are not sufficiently insulated for digital signals. This view, however, was not confirmed by the auditors’ findings. One television station staff member said that baluns may need to be replaced for good digital reception.

It was noted earlier that some antenna installers were not keen on combination antennas (‘combos’), despite others often installing them. Similar comments were made by some television station personnel, with two arguing that ‘low-gain combos’ are a problem, as the split VHF/UHF banding compromises the signal. One further stated that impulse noise is an issue for VHF Band III, as it overloads masthead amplifiers.

Antenna suitability for digital signalsThe broadcasters were generally reluctant to estimate the level of antenna suitability for digital signals, as they lack hands-on experience with household antennas. Instead, they were asked to provide at least an educated guess. As such, they were not asked to break it down into adequate, marginal and inadequate, and any opinion they could offer was accepted. The following comments were made: One respondent estimated 10 per cent in both areas would not have antennas

suitable for digital reception. Another estimated 10 per cent in Orange and 20 per cent in Bathurst.

Another suggested that antennas are more likely to be adequate in Orange, with the UHF transmission for digital following aggregation about 20 years ago, which led to some upgrading of antennas as well as televisions.

Another estimated that at least 15 per cent of households ‘would struggle’ with digital reception with the current antenna stock, including electronics (amplifiers, baluns), connections and antenna location. When pushed, he suggested that inadequate antennas would be apparent in 5–15 per cent of dwellings.

A few broadcaster staff expressed the opinion that antennas that are unsuitable for digital signals are in some cases still being installed in Bathurst and Orange.

acma | 64

Relative accuracy and coverage of alternative methods of estimating antenna stockThis section considers what the next best method for estimating antenna stock is for use in other areas when expert assessment is considered too expensive. Taking the accuracy of the expert assessments as a given, how close the outside-home audit, street-level observations and householder response methods are to the expert assessments in terms of antenna type, age and condition is now considered.

The relationships between the expert assessments and those obtained from the three alternative methods are shown in Tables 25 to 28 for the main antenna. The percentages in the tables are column percentages, showing the proportion of households within a given expert-assessed category that received the same or different assessment.

The results in Table 25 show that 70 per cent of the antennas judged to be ‘combined VHF/UHF’ according to expert judgment were also judged to be ‘combined VHF/UHF’ according to the household respondents. The equivalent figures are shown for the other two methods—outside-home audit and street-level observations.

The results highlighted in yellow show the rates of agreement with each of the expert-assessed categories. The overall accuracy of each of the alternative methods is obtained by calculating the percentage of all households sitting within the highlighted diagonal cells. To estimate whether antennas are ‘UHF only’, ‘VHF only’, ‘combined VHF/UHF’ or ‘other’, the method that would provide the most accurate estimates when expert assessment is not feasible is outside-home, with 71 per cent overall accuracy. This compares with 68 per cent accuracy for householder responses and 65 per cent for street-level observation. Because classifications of antenna type/bands are heavily concentrated on ‘combined VHF/UHF’, these results should be treated with some caution. Naive predictions like simply assuming all households have combined VHF/UHF can appear to perform well in such circumstances.

65 | acma

Table 25 Antenna type—expert view (ADT) compared with other three methods (householder response, outside-home and street-level)

Antenna type—ADT UHF only (%) VHF only (%) VHF/UHF (%) Overall

Antenna type—householder response

UHF 24 12 17 VHF 4 25 4 Combined VHF/UHF 64 38 70 Others 8 25 9 Accuracy 65Coverage 61

Antenna type—outside-home


Antenna type—street-level


acma | 66

Table 26 Antenna polarity—expert view (ADT) compared with other three methods (householder response, outside-home and street-level)

Antenna polarity—ADT Horizontal (%) Vertical (%)

Vertical/horizontal (%) Overall (%)

Antenna polarity—householder response

Horizontal 61 61 33 Combined horizontal and vertical 24 22 57 Vertical 14 13 7 Others 1 4 3 Accuracy 41Coverage 61

Antenna polarity—outside-home


Antenna polarity—street-level


67 | acma

In addition to considering the relative accuracy of the methods, the proportion of households for which an assessment could be made at all for each of the antenna stock variables—both individually and as a complete set of observations—also needs to be considered. For each variable, the coverage is shown in the table.

From Table 25, an assessment of antenna bandwidth could be made for 61 per cent of households using the householder response method, 93 per cent of households using outside-home assessment and 59 per cent of households using street-level observations. In the context of the above-mentioned caveat on the accuracy figures and the much higher coverage of the outside-home assessment than for either of the other methods, outside-home assessment may provide the next-best method for assessing antenna type/bands if expert technical assessment is not considered viable. Householder response may also be worth considering, particularly if site visits are not considered feasible.

The results for antenna polarity in Table 26 show more pronounced differences between the methods, with the overall accuracy of householder response the lowest at 41 per cent, and outside-home (64 per cent) and street-level (69 per cent) having similar accuracy. As was the case with antenna type/bands, the highest coverage was for outside-home at 93 per cent, followed by householder response at 61 per cent and street-level observations at 59 per cent. Considering accuracy and coverage together, it would appear that outside-home assessments are the next-best alternative to expert assessment.

acma | 68

Table 27 Antenna condition—expert view (ADT) compared with other three methods (householder response, outside-home and street-level)

Antenna condition—ADT (%)

Poor or very poor (%) Fair (%)

Good or excellent (%) Overall (%)

Antenna condition—householder response

Good—it looks new or almost new 62 66 71 Fair—some obvious wear and tear 38 30 26 Poor—there is clear evidence of wear and tear 0 4 3 Accuracy 52Coverage 90

Antenna condition—outside-home


Antenna condition—street-level


Table 28 Antenna age—expert view (ADT) versus householder responseAge of antenna—ADT

Less than 5 years (%) 5 to 10 years (%)

11 or more years (%) Overall (%)

Age of antenna—Householder response Less than 5 years 28 18 26 5 to 10 years 38 38 13 11 or more years 34 44 61 Accuracy 34Coverage 87

For measures of antenna condition, the overall accuracy was surprisingly similar across the three methods at just over 50 per cent (see Table 27). The patterns of classification were, however, different, with householder respondents more likely to rate their antenna as in good or excellent condition than the trained field staff. They only correctly identified their antenna as in poor or fair condition in just over one-quarter of cases. It is unclear whether the more positive assessment of householder respondents is a result of lack of expertise or inference based on quality of observed

69 | acma

television reception. The outside-home method had the highest coverage (98 per cent), followed by householder response (90 per cent) and street-level observation (60 per cent).

While the only alternative measure of antenna age obtained in this study was from householder response, it is nonetheless pertinent to consider the level of agreement between these estimates and those made by expert assessment. In this case, the expert judgments can only be considered approximate rather than accurate, given the difficulties in judging age from appearance alone. It is perhaps not surprising that the age results exhibit the lowest levels of agreement of all the antenna variables. For the three age ranges shown in the table, the overall agreement is only 34 per cent (see Table 28). Eighty-seven per cent of households were able to provide an estimate of the age of their main antenna.

A note on the conduct of outside-home observationsOutside-home observations combined data recorded (that is, determined) from the street with observations conducted within the property (but outside the home) if street-level observations were not possible due to visibility or other reasons. If street-level determinations could not be made by the auditor, they were required to locate the best position to observe the antenna and related equipment. This may have included the front, side, rear or back of the property itself, and required the householder’s permission. It is important to note that no observations or measurements taken within the home were included in the outside home observation methodology; however, the ACMA may deploy this method for future studies given it is potentially less intrusive than the full in-home audit.

From these results as a whole, taking into account both accuracy level and household coverage, the most effective method of predicting antenna digital reception suitability when expert technical assessment is not feasible is outside-home observations. Street-level observations on the key antenna stock variables of antenna type/band, polarisation, condition and height could only be made in 54 per cent of households. This raises questions about the viability of the street-level method as it cannot be assumed that non-observable households are missing from the sampled households at random. Householder responses produced a very high proportion of ‘don’t know’ responses, with complete estimates of these stock variables being obtained for fewer than 58 per cent of interviewed households. Consequently, this method is also limited in its potential application. The equivalent figure for the outside-home method was 94 per cent.

If the outside-home observation method was adopted, it may not be necessary to pre-recruit respondents prior to visiting the household. An auditing team would be able to identify households to visit using an agreed selection method, and visit each household to conduct a street-level observation. Where a street-level observation could not be made because of the visibility of the antenna and associated equipment, the auditor would attempt to contact the householder to gain permission to view the equipment from another vantage point surrounding (but within) the property. If the householder was unavailable, the auditor would leave a card requesting the householder make contact to arrange a suitable date to revisit. In the event that a householder refuses, or if contact is not established through the card drop or subsequent revisit, the household would be replaced with another sample point, sometimes being a neighbouring property.

acma | 70

Appendix A Influence of factors other than antenna stock on digital signal strengthAs noted in this report, a range of factors other than antenna type, age and condition can influence digital signal strength measured at the wall. These include additional set-up factors such as height of antenna from ground, direction of antenna, condition and type of cabling and connectors, and geographic and topographic factors such as distance to the transmitter sending the signal, obstructions such as buildings, and local landscape (hills, valleys).

Modelling was undertaken to identify the role of various non-antenna factors in influencing digital signal strength (based on 25dB MER) relative to the antenna stock variables. Specifically, CHAID (Chi-square automatic interaction detector) analysis was undertaken to provide a richer exploration of interaction effects. CHAID is a statistical procedure developed by Kass (1980) that efficiently searches for relations among a set of predictor variables and a dependant variable. It is particularly well suited to analysing interactions among categorical independent variables. Results are presented in the form of a classification tree that shows the interactions by splitting variables into separate branches. The breakdown of the dependant variable is shown at each node of the tree, allowing the distribution on the dependant variable within a given combination of variable levels to be readily identified.

In addition to the antenna stock variables of antenna type (bandwidth, polarisation), condition and age, the additional variables tested in these models were transmission source, condition of antenna cabling and connectors, obstructions such as buildings, landscape features, the height of the antenna from the ground and distance to relevant transmitter.

A number of CHAID models were run and classification trees for two preferred models for model fit and theoretical consistency are shown in figures 28 and 29. Each complete branch in these diagrams provides a rule for predicting ‘not adequate’ and ‘adequate’ groups. The percentages indicate the predicted proportions of the relevant group. For example, the branch ending in the bottom left box in Figure 28 represents the rule [(Transmission source=Mt Panorama) & (Antenna bandwidth=UHF only) & (Landscape observation=No landscape features affecting transmission)]. Of the households that this rule applies to, 57.1 per cent have adequate digital signal strength (shown inside the lowest box for the rule in question).

The tree in Figure 28 branches at the highest point into the two transmission sources. As expected, antenna type interacts with transmission source in influencing adequacy of digital reception. In particular, ‘UHF only’ bandwidth was found to produce lower adequacy of signals, consistent with the vertical polarisation of Mount Panorama transmissions. Landscape features had the next most important role in explaining signal adequacy for Mount Panorama. The absence of an interactive relationship between Mount Canobolas and antenna type is at least in part due to the lower incidence of antennas that are inconsistent with the type of transmissions.

For Mount Canobolas, distance from this source was the next most important variable influencing digital signal adequacy, with a distance threshold of 18 km providing the greatest differentiation on signal adequacy. For households located within 18 km of Mount Canobolas, antenna condition was then found to differentiate on digital signal adequacy. In the event that condition was at least fair, landscape features then came into play in explaining signal adequacy.

71 | acma

The tree in Figure 29 exhibits a different structure, although the variables found to have explanatory power are similar in their general nature to those in Figure 28. Rather than explicitly modelling interactions among the two transmission sites and antenna type variables, the model in Figure 29 includes a single variable that indicates whether or not the antenna type is consistent with the transmission source to which it is directed. For Mount Panorama, VHF vertical (alone or in combination) was coded as consistent and other antenna types coded as inconsistent. In the case of Mount Canobolas, antennas with UHF horizontal capability were coded as consistent.

Distance from source features prominently in this model, followed by the signal–antenna consistency variable. For households with an antenna type consistent with the source, ratings of antenna condition and connections were found to influence adequacy of digital signals. However, for suitable antenna types in good condition located within 18 km of the transmitter, local landscape features were the next most important driver of signal adequacy.

The sample sizes for this project are considered the minimum for modelling of this type and larger samples would be needed to reveal any more subtle effects.

Figure 28

acma | 72

Figure 29

73 | acma

Appendix BRecruitment Screener—community survey

April 2010ACMA Antennas Audit, Bathurst/Orange

Recruitment Screener—Community survey

Dates: 15 April onward

Details: 550 recruits (allowing for some loss—hard quota of 500)

Quota Details:

INTRODUCTION

Good morning / afternoon / evening. My name is ‘…’ from DBM Consultants, a professional market research company in Melbourne. We are conducting a project for the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), which is part of the Australian Government.

IF RESPONDENT QUERIES WHO THE ACMA ARE SAY: ACMA is the Australian Communications and Media Authority responsible for planning and regulating broadcasting services in Australia.

The Government has commissioned this important survey to help prepare for the switch from analog to digital television in the Bathurst and Orange regions, and to plan any future changes to digital television channels.

I need to speak with the person in your household who is 18 years or over and knows most about your television set. Is that you?

IF NOT, ASK FOR APPROPRIATE PERSON, REPEAT INTRODUCTION.

The survey is in two phases. Firstly there is a telephone interview, which should take around 15 minutes. Secondly, depending on the answers you give, there is a home visit by technical staff, during which your television aerial or antenna will be tested and some information about it will be recorded.

We are offering a cash incentive of $30 to each participating household if they take part in the home visit. We will also provide a free report on how well your aerial or antenna receives digital TV signals. If you are willing to take part in this survey, the information you provide will only be used for research

acma | 74

purposes and will remain strictly confidential. Just to reassure you, we are not selling anything.

IF RESPONDENT QUERIES HOME VISIT SECURITY ASPECTS SAY: Our technicians will have full ID to show you and you can check their status by calling us back. In any case, the technician who will be visiting your home will call you one day prior to your appointment to confirm your address and availability. Further information will be outlined in a confirmation letter that we will send to you.

IF RESPONDENT QUERIES THE HOME VISIT DETAILS SAY: I will be pleased to give you further details about the home audit visit but I need to check if you qualify for it first.

IF QUERIED ABOUT THE AUTHENTICITY OF RESEARCHI can email you a letter from the ACMA, which explains the purpose of the project and who to contact if you want more information.IF REQUIRED COLLECT EMAIL ADDRESS USING STANDARD EMAIL ADDRESS DOMAINS AND READ BACK TO RESPONDENT USING PHONETIC ALPHABET

EMAIL ADDRESS:__________

You can also call the enquiry line at the Australian Market and Social Research Society on 1300 36 4830.IF ACMA CONTACT/MORE CONTACTS ASKED FOR

You may also wish to contact the Project Manager at the ACMA, Dean Martin, on (02) 9334 7743.

IF QUERIED ABOUT HOW NAME WAS SOURCED [E.G. UNLISTED NUMBER]: We are contacting people in Bathurst/Orange via Random Digit Dialling, to ensure a representative selection of households has a chance to contribute to this key study. It is very important for data quality reasons to include as many households as possible in the survey.

S.1 Would you like to take part in this study?1 YES - CONTINUE2 BUSY/INCONVENIENT—ARRANGE CALL BACK3 REFUSED/ NOT INTERESTED—THANK AND CLOSE.

Demographics

D.1 Gender. DO NOT ASK. SINGLE CODE

Male 1Female 2

D.2 Firstly, which of the following age groups do you fall into? READ OUT. SINGLE CODEUnder 18 1 THANKS AND CLOSE18-24 years 225-29 years 330-39 years 440-49 years 5

75 | acma

50-59 years 660-69 years 770 years and over 8

TERMINATE IF CODE 1 AT D2: Unfortunately, we’re looking for people who are aged 18 or over. Thanks for your time. GoodbyeS.2 Can I please confirm the region or town that you live in since we need to speak to a cross section of people??

[CHOOSE TOWN OR REGION FROM LIST AND THEN RECORD POSTCODE]

TERMINATE IF QUOTA FAILED: Unfortunately, we’re looking for people in other areas to help with this research. Thanks for your time. Goodbye

CONTINUE IF AGREED:I’m now going to ask about the television equipment at the property you are speaking from now.

Q.1a Firstly, how many televisions do you have in your household? Write in: |___|___| TERMINATE IF ZERO OR D/K, ALL OTHERS CONTINUE

Q.1b And how many of those are capable of receiving at least one TV channel? Write in: |___|___| TERMINATE IF ZERO OR D/K, ALL OTHERS CONTINUE

Q.1c Has/have the/se television/s been used in the last six months for watching free to air TV?SINGLE CODEYes/some/all 1 CONTINUENo/none 2 TERMINATEDon’t know 3 TERMINATE

Q.1d What type/s of antenna/s, both inside and outside do you have for your TV/s? PROMPT IF NECESSARY. MULTIPLE CODING POSSIBLEAn internal antenna/portable indoor antenna (rabbit/bunny ears) 1 IF ONLY CODE 1 TERMINATEAn antenna located in your roof space 2An external antenna located outside or on your roof 3A satellite dish 4Other type (specify) 5 Don’t know 6

ASK Q1e IF CODE 3 AT Q1d. OTHERS SKIP TO Q2

Q1e [IF CODE 4 ALSO SELECTED AT Q1d (SATELLITE DISH) ADD: Apart from your satellite dish how] [How] many separate external antennas, that is rooftop or outside antennas, do you have at the property?Write in: |___|___|Don’t know 99

acma | 76

Q.1f Now thinking inside your home, is the wall socket that connects your television to the antenna cable easily accessible. By this I mean, can you see it without moving anything?

Yes 1 [Go to Q2]No 2

Q.1g [If Q1f=2, then ask] Are you able to make it accessible for technical staff to view the wall socket on the day of the in-home visit?

Yes 1No [TERMINATE] 2

TERMINATE SPIEL: Thank you very much for your time, unfortunately we are looking to speak to households where the wall socket is accessible as we need to take readings from them. Goodbye. ASK ALL:

Q2 Do you receive……? READ OUT. SINGLE CODE

Only free to air TV 1CONTINUEOnly cable, satellite or pay TV subscription 2TERMINATE Or, both free to air TV as well as cable, satellite or pay TV 3CONTINUE(Don’t know) 4TERMINATE

Q.3 Do you receive any free to air digital channels at the present time? SINGLE CODE. IF UNSURE SELECT CODE 3Yes 1 CONTINUENo 2 GO TO Q.5Don’t know 3 GO TO Q.5

Q4 Which of the following free-to-air digital channels does your household currently receive? READ OUT. MULTICODE Any ABC (including ABC2, 3) 1Any SBS 2Any Prime (including 7Two) 3One 4Any WIN (including Go!) 5Any SC 6Any others (specify) 7Don’t know 8

NOW SKIP TO Q.6Q5 Which of the following free-to-air analog channels does your

household currently receive? READ OUT. MULTICODE

ABC 1SBS 2Prime 3

77 | acma

WIN 4Any others (specify) 5Don’t know 6None of these 7 TERMINATE

Q.6 How old is your [IF 2+ TVS IN Q1B <main>] TV? IF NECESSARY: By main TV I mean the one that most people in the household watch most of the time.AID IF NECESSARY. ASK FOR BEST ESTIMATE IF UNSURE. SINGLE CODELess than one year 11-2 years 2Over two to five years 3Over five to 10 years 4More than 10 years 5Don’t know 6

Q.7 Does your [main] TV have a built-in digital tuner? SINGLE CODEYes 1No 2Don’t know 3

Q.8a Do you have a DVD recorder or other recording device connected to your [main] TV? SINGLE CODE

IF YES—Check which type and record below[INTERVIEWER NOTE: If respondent says DVD player, clarify to see if it is capable of recording content from the TV onto a disc. Only if YES, then code as 1.Yes/hard disk/PVR/DVD recorder 1 CONTINUEYes/other (e.g. video recorder/VCR) 2 CONTINUENo/does not 3 GO TO Q.10Don’t know 4 GO TO Q.10

Q.8b Does[Do] [IF Q8a = 1 & 2, add ‘any of’] your recording device[s] have a built-in digital tuner? MULTI CODEYes 1 CONTINUENo 2 GO TO Q.10Don’t know 3 GO TO Q.10

Q.9 Do you view TV programs on your [main] TV through the recording device? SINGLE CODEYes 1No 2Don’t know 3

ASK ALLQ.10 Do you have a free-to-air digital set top box connected to your [main]

TV? SINGLE CODEYes 1No 2Don’t know 3

acma | 78

ASK IF HAVE 2+ TVS IN Q.1B AND EITHER CODE 1 TO Q7, Q8b OR 10. OTHERS GO TO Q.13

Q.11 Does any other TV in your household receive digital free to air channels? SINGLE CODEYes/receives digital 1No/does not 2Don’t know 3

Q.12 CODING NOTE: CHECK THE VALIDITY OF ANSWERS AGAINST THE FOLLOWING LOGIC PATTERN. IF IT VARIES, CHECK ANSWERS TO Q.7, Q8b, Q10 AND Q11 AGAIN.Code 1—All digital household:((Q1b>=1.and.Q1b<=99).and.(Q7=1.or.Q8b=1.or.Q10=1.or.Q11=1))Code 2—All analog household:((Q1b>=1.and.Q1b<=99).and.(Q7<>1.and. Q8b<>1.and. Q10<>1.and.

Q11<>1))

ANTENNAS USED AT HOUSEHOLD SECTION

ASK ALLQ.13 What type of property do you live in? Would that be… READ

OUT. SINGLE CODE

Rural homestead 1GO TO Q.17aDetached (separate) house which is not a rural homestead 2GO TO Q.17aSemi-detached, duplex, terrace or townhouse 3CONTINUEUnit/flat or apartment up to three stories/floors 4CONTINUEUnit flat or apartment with 4+ stories/floors 5CONTINUEOther (specify) 6CONTINUE(Don’t know/refused) 7CONTINUE

Q.14. Do you have your own rooftop antenna or satellite dish for receiving television broadcasts, or do you share with other neighbouring properties, apartments or flats? SINGLE CODEYes/have own 1No/shared 2Don’t know 3

IF HAVE A SATELLITE DISH ONLY (Q1d = 4 ONLY), GO TO Q24a. OTHERS CONTINUE

Q17a Earlier you said that you have <an> external antenna(s)>, can you please tell me how old [IF MORE THAN ONE ANTENNA MENTIONED AT Q1E: <your MAIN external antenna is> is the external antenna?

ASK FOR BEST ESTIMATE IF UNSURE

79 | acma

NOTE: IF HAVE MULTIPLE ANTENNAS AT Q1E AND NOT ANSWERED DON’T KNOW AT EITHER Q17A (CODE 99) OR Q17AA (CODE 5), ASK Q17A to Q21B FOR EACH ANTENNA (DP: INSERT QUESTION LOOPS TO MATCH NUMBER OF ANTENNAS MENTIONED AT Q1E)IF MULTIPLE ANTENNAS, FOR LOOP 2+ INSERT <And, how old is the next antenna>Write in number of years |___|___|Less than one year 98Don’t know 99

Q17aa IF RESPONDENT IS STILL UNSURE USE FOLLOWING BANDS. OK, so do you think it is…?Between one and five years 1Between six and 10 years 2Between 11 and 20 years 3More than 20 years old 4(Don’t know) 5

Q17b How would you rate the physical condition and appearance of the [<main external antenna>]By condition, I do NOT mean the picture or audio quality, I mean only the antenna itself.NOTE: Allow the respondent to view or check it if necessary.IF MULTIPLE ANTENNAS, FOR LOOP 2+ INSERT < next antenna>]? Would that be…? READ OUT. SINGLE CODEGood—it looks new or almost new, minimal damage or wear is visible

1Fair—some obvious wear and tear from age but otherwise okay

2Poor—there is clear evidence of wear and tear, corrosion or damage

3(Don’t know) 4

Q.18 Is the [<main external antenna> IF MULTIPLE ANTENNAS, FOR LOOP 2+ INSERT < next antenna>] on a pole or mast connected to the house, including the roof, or is it connected to the ground and not to the house or the roof? SINGLE CODEHouse/roof 1 CONTINUEGround 2 CONTINUEDon’t know 3 CONTINUE

Q.19 What height is the [<main external antenna> IF MULTIPLE ANTENNAS, FOR LOOP 2+ INSERT < next antenna>], from the ground to the top of the antenna? SINGLE CODE. READ OUT IF NECESSARY. ASK FOR BEST ESTIMATE IF UNSURE

Less than five meters 1Five to ten meters 2More than 10 meters 3(In roof space) 4(Don’t know) 5

Q.20 Is a masthead amplifier installed on the [<main external antenna> IF MULTIPLE ANTENNAS, FOR LOOP 2+ INSERT < next antenna>]? IF

acma | 80

UNSURE: If you need to plug the amplifier or a box connected to the antenna or cable into a power supply, then it is probably a masthead amplifier. SINGLE CODEYes 1No 2Don’t know 3

Q21a What type of [<main external antenna> IF MULTIPLE ANTENNAS AND NOT ANSWERED DON’T KNOW AT EITHER Q21A (CODE 99) OR Q21B (CODE 10), FOR LOOP 2+ INSERT < next antenna>] do you have? IF UNSURE: We just want your best guess as to what type it is. IF STILL UNSURE: Please just describe what it looks like if you can. WRITE IN VERBATIM. Don’t know 99

NOW PROMPT AS FOLLOWS:

Q21b Which of the following type of [<main external antenna> IF MULTIPLE ANTENNAS, FOR LOOP 2+ INSERT < next antenna>] best describes yours? READ OUT IF UNSURE: We just want your best guess as to what type it is. Horizontal UHF antenna 1Horizontal VHF antenna 2Combined UHF/VHF antenna, both components are horizontal 3Combined UHF/VHF antenna, UHF is horizontal, VHF component is vertical 4Combined UHF/VHF antenna, both components are vertical 5Phased array—horizontal 6Phased array—vertical 7UHF/VHF caravan antenna 8Satellite dish 9Other type (specify) 10 (Don’t know) 11

Q21c Who installed your (IF MORE THAN ONE <main>) external antenna?IF CONTRACTOR/VENDOR/TRADESMEN MENTIONED, ASK WHAT TYPE—AID IF NECESSARY. MULTICODE POSSIBLE

Self/did it myself 1 CONTINUEInstalled by another household member 2 CONTINUEAntenna/antenna supplier 3 CONTINUESpecialist antenna installer 4 CONTINUEElectrician 5 CONTINUEHandyman 6 CONTINUEBuilder 7 CONTINUEFriend/relative 8 CONTINUEOther (specify) 9 CONTINUEAlready there when moved in 10 GO TO Q.21eDon’t know 11 GO TO Q.21e

Q21d Were there any problems installing your (IF MORE THAN ONE <main>) external antenna? SINGLE CODEYes 1No 2

Don’t know 3

81 | acma

Q21e How visible is the/are the antenna(s) from the street in front of the property? SINGLE CODEPROBE IF CLEARLY OR PARTIALLY VISIBLEYes/clearly visible from street 1Yes/partly/not clearly visible from street 2Not visible from street 3Not visible from street but visible from elsewhere at ground level 4Not visible at all from ground level 5(Don’t know) 6

ASK ALLQ24a At the current time, how would you rate the overall TV reception quality

you receive? Would that be… READ OUT IN FULL AS BELOW. SINGLE CODE

[DP NOTE: IF Q12 = Code 1, appear as it was originally. However IF Q12 = Code 2, then make the ones in the brackets appear instead of the original descriptions after each broad rating]

Excellent—there are no problems with picture or sound [there is no noticeable deterioration in your reception]

1

Good—there may be infrequent pixellation or sound issues, but they are not annoying [there is some deterioration but it is not annoying]

2

Fair—there are occasional problems and they are slightly annoying [there is some deterioration and it is slightly annoying to you]

3

Poor—there are frequent problems, and they are annoying [there is obvious deterioration and it is annoying]

4

Bad—there are very frequent or lengthy problems, that are very annoying [your reception is unwatchable and very annoying]

5

Varies across channels 6 DO NOT READ OUT

(Don’t know) 7 DO NOT READ OUT

Q24b Do you think that you live in an area with poor television reception coverage? SINGLE CODEYes 1No 2Don’t know 3

ASK IF HAD POOR, BAD OR VARIABLE RECEPTION—CODE 4 OR 5 OR 6 TO Q.24a. OTHERS GO TO Q.25

Q24c Have you had a technical or antenna specialist investigate the (DP INSERT CODE FROM Q24A…poor/bad/variable...) reception quality, or will you do so? SINGLE CODEYes/have 1 CONTINUEHave not but will do so 2 GO TO Q.25No/have not 3 GO TO Q.25Don’t know 4 GO TO Q.25

ASK IF Q24C IS CODE 1. OTHERS TO Q25

acma | 82

Q24d What did the technician say was the cause of the problem? DO NOT READ OUT. ACCEPT MULTIPLES

The area/ poor reception area 1Condition of antenna/worn out/ old 2The landscape/hills/slope etc 3Distance from transmitter site/signal 4TV worn out/ old 5Connections/cable old/worn out 6Other (specify) 7Don’t know 8

Q.26 Now I’d like to ask you a few questions about the connections or cables to the main external antenna. That is, the connection or cable that runs between the antenna itself to the building or external power points, not inside your property.What type of connection or cable do you have to the main external antenna?WRITE IN VERBATIM.

Don’t know 99NOW PROMPT AS FOLLOWS:

Q.27 Would that be… READ OUT. SINGLE CODE

A Coaxial cable, which looks like a normal electrical lead 1A ribbon cable, which is flat, and may have gaps in it 2Other type (specify) 3(Don’t know) 4 DO NOT READ OUT

Q.28 Just before we finish, can you describe the land immediately around your property?That is, the slope of the land or any natural features that surround your property? PROMPT IF NECESSARYWRITE IN VERBATIM.

ACCEPT DON’T KNOW AND WRITE IN ‘DON’T KNOW’ IN TEXT BOX ABOVE THEN CONTINUENOW PROMPT AS FOLLOWS:

Q29 Can I clarify that the landscape which immediately surrounds your property as…..? READ OUT. SINGLE CODEFlat or level 1Undulating or slightly sloping only 2Sloping, but no hills 3Hilly or very uneven 4Something else (specify) 5(Don’t know) 6 DO NOT READ OUT

Q.30 Finally, which of the following best describes the environment immediately surrounding your property…? Is it…READ OUT. SINGLE CODE Suburban residential (mainly single or two storey buildings) 1

83 | acma

Taller residential buildings (mainly apartment blocks) 2Industrial buildings (factories, offices, warehouses, etc) 3Cleared farmland (crops, grazing, horticulture, viticulture etc) 4Uncleared land including trees 5Something else (specify) 6(Don’t know) 7 DO NOT READ OUT

IF NOT CODE 3 AT Q1D READ OUT: Thank you very much for your time. The information you have provided will be extremely useful to the ACMA in preparation for digital switchover. I mentioned that we would like to visit your home to conduct some tests and evaluations. However, since you do not have an external antenna we no longer need to do this.

NEXT SECTION APPLIES IF RESPONDENT HAS AT LEAST ONE EXTERNAL ANTENNA (CODE 3 AT Q1D)

INTERVIEWER—NOW SET UP HOME AUDIT

As I mentioned earlier, we will need to visit your home to test your television antenna and record some information about it. [IF Q1g=1, then add: ‘You mentioned earlier that your wall socket that connects your television to the antenna cable is not easily accessible, so it would be appreciated if you make sure that it is accessible on the day of the visit.] The study will help Government provide advice to householders during the switchover from analog to digital television and plan any future changes to digital television channels.

A $30 cash incentive will be paid to all participants who complete this part of the study. Furthermore, we will also provide a free report on how your antenna will perform once digital TV broadcasting begins in your area.

IF NECESSARY: We will need to visit your home to test your television antenna and record some information about it. This involves plugging a meter into the wall outlet used for your main television set and taking a signal measurement. All cables will be reconnected after the tests are complete. They will also assess the picture and sound quality for the channels you receive. They will also have to take a photo of your television, the antenna and any mast. The visit will take up to 30 minutes. We shall then send you a report on your antenna’s readiness for the digital switchover as a thank you, in addition to the $30 we will also be giving you.

IF NECESSARY: We have never damaged equipment during meter testing

acma | 84

IF RESPONDENT REFUSES TO TAKE PART EXPLAIN THAT $30 INCENTIVE WILL ONLY BE PAID IF TAKE PART IN FOLLOW UP HOME VISIT

Name:

_______________________________________________________________Address:

_______________________________________________________________Phone No. |___|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|Alternative/mobile number: |___|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|

Best time/s for visit:

What date and time would best suit you?IF NOT:What time and date would suit you?Date: ____/____/2010Times:

______________________________________________________________

Can you please tell me your email address so we can send you the report and confirmation letter?[INTERVIEWER NOTE: IF NONE, say: That is ok, we will mail the report and confirmation letter to you]EXPLAIN THE FOLLOWING:We will call you again to confirm the time for the home visit.

RESPONDENT NUMBER:Write in: |___|___|___|___|Interviewer name:_______________________________________________________Date: ____/____/2010

85 | acma

Appendix CIn-home equipment audit—community survey

March/April 2010ACMA Antenna Audit, Bathurst/Orange

In-home equipment audit—Community survey 15 April 2010

PRE INTERVIEW TELEPHONE CONTACT THE DAY BEFORE SCHEDULED APPOINTMENT

Good morning / afternoon / evening. I’m ‘…’ from DBM Consultants. Our office recently contacted you and we did a telephone interview and organised a home visit with you. I am just ringing to confirm our appointment for [DATE/TIME]. I will see you at [ADDRESS].

Just to remind you, this is the follow-up to the telephone study we are doing for the Australian Government on television antennas. It will take about 30 minutes.

IF NECESSARY ADD:

I will have my DBM identity badge with me on the day of the appointment.

The study has been commissioned by Australian Communications and Media Authority. I will bring the identification papers so you can be assured that this is a legitimate study. Should you need further information, please feel free to contact Dean Martin at the ACMA. His number is 02 9334 7743. You can also call the Surveyline at the Australian Market and Social Research Society on 1300 36 4830. This national phone service allows you to check the bona fides of research companies in one phone call.

ON ARRIVAL AT THE DWELLING

Observe the antennas and determine whether there are one or two. If there are two observe if they are pointing indifferent directions. Then move to introductions. Good morning / afternoon / evening. I’m ‘…’ from DBM Consultants. I called [YESTERDAY] and we have an appointment with (…name of person who agreed to the audit…) to continue the study on your television antenna that we started on the telephone.

CONTINUE IF RESPONDENT AVAILABLE

Just to confirm the purpose of today’s visit is to check the TV equipment you use, including the television antenna and connections between the antenna and the TV receiver itself.

acma | 86

As you may recall, we are conducting this project for the Australian Communica-tions and Media Authority (ACMA) about switching to digital television in the Ba-thurst and Orange regions.

NOTE: SHOW THE RESPONDENT THE STANDARD LETTER FROM ACMA AND YOUR IDENTITY CARD.

NOW SAY: I will firstly need to check that your TV is working today, so I will need to come into your home. Then I will go outside and record some information and take photos of your antenna, and then come inside to record more information about your television equipment and take some photos.

IF THE TARGET RESPONDENT IS NOT IN, ASK WHEN THEY WILL BE HOME AND SET CALL-BACK TIME.

TRY CALLING RESPONDENT IF POSSIBLE. ONLY ENTER PROPERTY IF AN ADULT (18+) IS PRESENT

RECORD THE FOLLOWING:

Respondent name:

___________________________________________________________________

Identity number: |___|___|___|___| NOTE: Must be same as CATI interview ID

Area type: Bathurst area/2795 1Orange/2800 2Blayney/2799 3Millthorpe/2798 4Molong/2866 5

Address

___________________________________________________________________

SAY: To start with, I need to have a look at your MAIN television set. Can you please turn it on for me?

ASK HOUSEHOLDER TO INDICATE THE MAIN TV (THAT IS, THE TV THAT MOST PEOPLE WATCH MOST OF THE TIME, WHICH COULD BE IN A COMMUNAL AREA AND MAY HAVE THE MOST EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH IT. FOR MAIN TV, TURN ON THE TV AND RECORD THE FOLLOWING

IF ASKED ABOUT POTENTIAL DAMAGE SAY: Please be assured that we have never damaged equipment during this process. We have technicians on standby on the phone and we can also call in a technician if necessary.

Q.S1 Is the main TV working? CHECK BY ASKING HOUSEHOLDER TO SELECT A FEW DIFFERENT CHANNELS AND ENSURING IT RECEIVES SOUND AND PICTURE (e.g. ABC, SBS ETC).

87 | acma

Yes 1 CONTINUENo 2 TERMINATE AND END: I’m sorry we need to check TV sets that work.

Q.S2 Is it receiving Digital or only Analog? CHECK IT IS DIGITAL BY SELECTING AND VIEWING EITHER ‘7 TWO’ OR ‘PRIME TWO’ OR ‘ONE ‘OR ‘GO’, FOR INSTANCE. IF IT DOES NOT RECEIVE ANY OF THESE CHANNELS CODE TV AS ANALOG

Digital 1Analog only 2

NOW TELL RESPONDENT THAT YOU WILL NEED TO GO OUTSIDE TO RECORD SOME INFORMATION ABOUT THE ANTENNA/S BUT WILL COME BACK SHORTLY. THEY CAN LEAVE TV ON

STREET LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

RECORD AUTOMATICALLY FROM STREET LEVEL DIRECTLY OUTSIDE THE DWELLING. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO VIEW ANTENNA FROM ANYWHERE ELSE (REAR/SIDE OF DWELLING, FOR INSTANCE)

QS3. Which of the following can you easily determine from the street level outside the dwelling?

TICK AS APPROPRIATE. DP PROGRAM BELOW AS CHECK BOX

YOU MAY NOW MOVE TO THE BEST POSITION TO VIEW THE ANTENNA(S). THIS MAY BE ANYWHERE AROUND THE DWELLING INCLUDING GARDEN, SIDE, REAR, FOR INSTANCE

ENVIRONMENTAL AND ANTENNA SECTION

Q.1 RECORD FOR ALLType of dwelling. CODE ONE ONLYRural homestead 1GO TO Q.3Detached (separate) house which is not a rural homestead 2GO TO Q.3Semi-detached, duplex, terrace or townhouse 3CONTINUEUnit/flat or apartment up to three stories/floors 4CONTINUEUnit flat or apartment with 4+ stories/floors 5CONTINUEOther (specify) 6CONTINUE(Don’t know/refused) 7CONTINUE

Q.2 Is the antenna or satellite dish shared with other residencies or used solely by the respondent household? Not shared 1Shared 2Don’t know 3

acma | 88

NOW TAKE TWO PICTURES OF THE ANTENNA FROM DIFFERENT ANGLES.ENSURE YOU PHOTOGRAPH THE MASTHEAD IF PRESENT.

LOG AS BELOW:Two photos of antenna from different positions

ANSWER FOR ALL

Q.3 Rate the condition of the external antenna. CODE ONE ONLYGood—it looks new or almost new, minimal damage or wear is visible


2Poor—there is clear evidence of wear and tear, corrosion or damage

3(Don’t know) 4

Q.4 What problems or faults, if any, are observable with the antenna? REFER TO THE GUIDE FOR TYPES

Write in:

__________________________________________________________________None/no faults 99

IF ANY FAULTS ARE OBSERVABLE: TAKE AT LEAST TWO PHOTOS OF ANY OBSERVABLE FAULTS OR DEFECTS FROM DIFFERENT ANGLES.LOG AS BELOW:

Two photos of antenna faults

Q.5 Is the antenna on a pole or mast that is connected to the house, including the roof, or connected to the ground?House/roof 1Ground 2

Q.6 What height is the antenna, from the ground to the top of the antenna? NOTE: IF HOUSEHOLD HAS MULTIPLE EXTERNAL ANTENNAS,

RECORD FOR MAIN ANTENNA. CODE ONE ONLY

Less than five meters 1Five to ten meters 2More than 10 meters 3(In roof space) 4Don’t know 5

Q.7 What height is the antenna from where it is fitted to the roof to the top of the antenna? CODE ONE ONLYLess than five meters 1Five to ten meters 2More than 10 meters 3(In roof space) 4Don’t know 5

89 | acma

Q.8 Is a masthead amplifier installed? REFER TO PHOTOS IN YOUR WORKBOOK. Yes 1—TAKE PHOTONo 2Don’t know 3

IF YES (MASTHEAD AMP IS INSTALLED)—take a close up photo of the masthead amplifier

LOG AS BELOW:

Close up photo of masthead amplifier

Q.9 Record type of antenna: NOTE: USE PHOTO GUIDE AS AID. CODE ONE ONLYHorizontal UHF antenna 1Horizontal VHF antenna 2Combined UHF/VHF antenna, both components are horizontal

3Combined UHF/VHF antenna, both components are vertical 4Combined UHF/VHF antenna, UHF is horizontal, VHF component is vertical 5Phased array—horizontal 6Phased array—vertical 7UHF/VHF caravan antenna 8Other type (specify) ________________________________________________ 9Don’t know/not observable 10

Q.10 IF KNOWN—Write in the brand and model/type (E.g., Matchmaster/Hills/Optimax)

Brand: _____________________________________

Model/type: _____________________________________Q.11 What type of cable is fitted to the antenna (between antenna and

roof/property/power supply)?

USE PHOTO GUIDE AS AID

Coaxial cable 1A ribbon cable 2Other type (specify) _______________________________________

3Don’t know 4

NOW TAKE A PHOTO OF THE CABLE. USE CAMERA ZOOM AS FAR AS POSSIBLE WITHOUT COMPROMISING QUALITY. IF THERE ARE OBVIOUS DEFECTS OR THE CONDITION LOOKS POOR/WORN THEN TAKE FURTHER PHOTOS AS A RECORD.

LOG AS BELOW:Photos of cable fitted to antenna Photos of defects (if applicable)

acma | 90

Q.12 Rate the condition of the connection/s to the antenna. CODE ONE ONLYGood—it looks new or almost new, minimal damage or wear is visible


2Poor—there is clear evidence of wear and tear and/or damage

3Don’t know 4

Now take a photo of the connector.

LOG AS BELOW:Photo of connector

Q.13 What problems or faults, if any, are observable with the connections?Write in:

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

None/no faults 99

Q.14 Is the topography of the land immediately around the dwelling…..CODE ONE ONLY Flat or level 1Undulating/ a slight slope only2Sloping, though with no hills 3Hilly or very uneven 4Other (specify) ______________________________________5Don’t know 6

Q.15 Are there any features of the landscape that would affect transmission strength or consistency? IF NONE CODE 99None 99

Q.16 Describe the environment immediately surrounding the property? CODE ONE ONLYSuburban residential (mainly single or two storey buildings)

1Taller residential buildings (mainly apartment blocks) 2Industrial buildings (factories, offices, warehouses, etc) 3Cleared farmland (crops, grazing, horticulture, viticulture etc) 4Uncleared land including trees 5

Something else (specify)6

91 | acma

TAKE TWO PHOTOS OF THE LANDSCAPE IN THE DIRECTION OF THE TRANSMITTER (REFER TO MAP), WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS THE TERRAIN BETWEEN THE DWELLING AND THE TRANSMITTER. IT DOESN’T MATTER IF YOU CANNOT SEE THE TRANSMITTER—TAKE PHOTOS ANYWAY.

LOG AS BELOW:Two photos of landscape

COMPASS BEARINGS

NOW TAKE A COMPASS BEARING OF THE DIRECTION THE ANTENNA IS FACING. IF ANTENNA IS NOT VISIBLE CODE 99. TAKE THE COMPASS BEARING OF ANY SECOND ANTENNA THAT HAS BEEN OBSERVED.

Q.17 For Antenna 1 write down degrees from compass (e.g. 30 degrees):____________________

For Antenna 2 write down degrees from compass (e.g. 30 degrees): __________________

Antenna not visible 99

Q.18 Is the antenna facing the same direction as that of the neighbouring properties? NOTE: Define neighbouring as the properties on the same side of the street nearest the antenna. CODE ONE ONLYYes/all facing same general direction 1No/different 2Not observable/can’t tell 3

NOW GO BACK INSIDE THE DWELLING. START OF IN HOME AUDIT

Q.19 NOW LET RESPONDENT KNOW THAT YOU WILL NEED TO TAKE READINGS AND PHOTOS WHICH WILL INVOLVE ATTACHING THE SIGNAL METER TO THE WALL PLATE OF THE PRIMARY TV AND LOGGING THE SIGNALS. TAKE A PHOTO OF THE METER AND ATTACHMENT. TAKE A PHOTO OF THE TV AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT, IF APPROPRIATE.

LOG AS BELOW: CHECK

Logged signal at wall plate Taken photo of meter attached to the wall plate Taken photo of wall plateTaken photo of TV Taken photo of Set top box (If any)

Note the Log Number for future reference

If there are two antennas take a log of both Orange and Bathurst and record the second Log No.

AFTER SIGNAL TEST COMPLETED, MAKE SURE CABLES ARE REATTACHED!

acma | 92

Q.20 Which of the following is attached to the main TV? CODE ALL THAT APPLYPay TV Top box 1DVD recorder with built-in digital /receiver recorder 2DVD player without digital receiver/recorder 3Digital set top box (other than pay TV) 4PVR/Hard Disc Drive (HDD) Recorders 5None of these 6 (CODE IF NONE OF THE ABOVE)

ASK HOUSEHOLDER TO ASSIST IN CHANNEL SELECTION, IF NECESSARY

Rate the sound and picture quality of each ANALOG (IF ANALOG TV) OR DIGITAL (IF DIGITAL TV AT QS2, SKIP TO Q22a) station in the appropriate grid for the main TV:

NOTE: Rate only the free to air channels, not pay TV

Q.21a ANALOG SCALE AS FOLLOWS (DO NOT USE FOR DIGITIAL—SKIP TO Q22a) Use the following coding and write in the appropriate number for each.

WHICH CHANNELS ARE RECEIVABLE? (TICK BELOW) SPEND 20-30 SECONDS ASSESSING EACH CHANNEL

Yes, Receivable Not Receivable

Q.21b ANALOG LIST—FOR THOSE WITH ANALOG TV

ENTER NUMBER BETWEEN 1 AND 5 FROM SCALE ABOVE FOR EACH CHANNELS’ PICTURE AND SOUND QUALITY AND OVERALL PERFORMANCE. IF CHANNEL NOT RECEIVABLE, THEM MARK AS SUCH

Q.22a DIGITAL SCALE AS FOLLOWS (DO NOT USE FOR ANALOG) Use the following coding and write in the appropriate number for each.

WHICH CHANNELS ARE RECEIVABLE? (TICK BELOW) .SPEND 20-30 SECONDS ASSESSING EACH CHANNEL

Yes, Receivable Not Receivable

Q.22b DIGITAL LIST—FOR THOSE WITH DIGITAL TV

93 | acma

ENTER NUMBER BETWEEN 1 AND 5 FROM SCALE ABOVE FOR EACH CHANNELS’ PICTURE AND SOUND QUALITY AND OVERALL PERFORMANCE. IF CHANNEL NOT RECEIVABLE, THEN MARK AS SUCH

Q.23 Rate the condition of the wallplate where the antenna cable enters from the TV. CODE ONE ONLYGood—it looks new or almost new, minimal damage or wear is visible


2Poor—there is clear evidence of wear and tear and/or damage

3Don’t know 4

Q.24 What problems or faults, if any, are observable with the wallplate?Write in:

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

END OF AUDIT.

IF THERE IS A SECOND EXTERNAL ANTENNA THAT POINTS IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION TO THE FIRST ANTENNA ASSESSED (BUT IS NOT A SATELLITE DISH) THEN COMPLETE A SECOND AUDIT SHEET.

Thanks very much for your time. It has been most helpful. I have most of the information I need so I don’t need to bother you anymore.

acma | 94

IMPORTANT:MAKE SURE ALL CONNECTIONS ARE REATTACHED AND ASK HOUSEHOLDER TO CONFIRM THE TV AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT IS IN FULL WORKING ORDER AND ALL PRESENT. SAY: Are you happy that everything is present and in working order before I leave?

GIVE INCENTIVE LETTER TO RESPONDENT TO SIGN (BOTH REGARDING TELEVISION EQUIPMENT WORKING PROPERLY AND THAT INCENTIVE HAS BEEN RECEIVED). ONCE SIGNED, GIVE $30 TO RESPONDENT.

LOG AS BELOW: CHECK

Signed disclaimer?Signed for and received incentive?

I you have any further questions, you can call our office on 1800 063 989 to speak to Alan Ren, my project manager. Or if you like, you can speak with Dean Martin at ACMA on 02 9334 7743.

NOW RECORD THE FOLLOWING:

Interviewer/auditor name:_______________________________________________________

Date: ____/____/2010Time: |___|___|___|___| (Use 24 hr clock)

OFFICE USE ONLY: TECHNICAL OPINION REGARDING COMPATIBILITY OF ANTENNA FOR DIGITAL TRANSMISSION

Record the extent to which the antenna is suitable for digital changeover based on initial switchover and potential restacking options.

95 | acma

Appendix DIndustry questionnaire—television stations

May 2010ACMA Antennas Audit, Bathurst/Orange

Industry questionnaire—TV stations

Dates: 15 April onwardDetails: Quota of five interviewsStation:

1 ABC (Central West 139994)2 Southern Cross Ten (Bathurst Rd Orange 6362.2144)3 SBS (14 Herbert St Artarmon) 18005007274 Prime (Bathurst Rd Orange, 6361.6888)5 WIN (63315876 in Bathurst, 6391.1699 in Orange)

ON CONTACT WITH ORGANISATION

May I speak to (…name from sample….)?Make call-back time if unavailable.INTRODUCTION

Good morning / afternoon / evening. My name is ‘…’ from DBM Consultants. We are conducting a project for the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), about the switch from analog to digital television in the Bathurst and Orange regions.

We would like to interview you at your place of work. The interview will help ACMA estimate current domestic antenna stock and its suitability for digital free to air broadcasts.

S.1 Are you willing to participate?1 YES - CONTINUE2 BUSY/INCONVENIENT—ARRANGE CALL BACK3 REFUSED/ NOT INTERESTED—THANK AND CLOSE.

IF QUERIED ABOUT THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF THE RESEARCH

We will not attribute anything you tell us to you personally and all information remains confidential. Nothing about your business activities will be revealed to either the ACMA or to other businesses.IF QUERIED ABOUT THE AUTHENTICITY OF RESEARCH

I can email or fax you a letter from ACMA which explains the purpose of the project and who to contact of you want more information.

acma | 96

IF ACMA CONTACT/MORE CONTACTS ASKED FORYou may also wish to contact the Project Manager at the ACMA, Dean Martin, on (02) 9334 7743.

CONTINUE IF AGREED:

INTERVIEW TIME: |___|___|___|___| AM/PM DATE:____/____/2010

ADDRESS:

__________________________________________________________

CONTACT NO. |___|___|____|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|

NAME OF RESPONDENT

__________________________________________________________

LOCATION

__________________________________________________________

Q.1 Are you familiar with both the Bathurst (Mt Panorama) and Orange (Mt Canobolas) in terms of the transmission quality, local reception issues etc? (If no, what area are they familiar with?) Mt Panorama/Bathurst 1Mt Canobolas/Orange 2Both Orange/Bathurst 3

Q.2 IF FAMILIAR WITH BOTHThinking about the Bathurst/Orange area, does reception quality vary much across the two regions? Which has particularly good or bad reception?

Q.3A ASK ABOUT BATHURST OTHERS GO TO Q.4Thinking about the Bathurst area, what do you think of the reception quality overall?Probe: What area/s are particularly good or bad?

Q.3B What local factors affect reception? Where in particular?(Probe for terrain, distance, interference, etc)

Q.4A ASK ABOUT ORANGE OTHERS GO TO Q.4Thinking about the Central Tablelands area, what do you think of the reception quality overall?Probe: What area/s are particularly good or bad?

Q.4B What local factors affect reception? Where in particular?(Probe for terrain, distance, interference, etc)

Q.5 Does the station get many calls about reception problems?IF YES—what sort of problems?

Q.6 What area/s do these calls most often come from?

97 | acma

(Probe—are there any times or situations where they are more common, e.g., weather, times, etc)

Q.7 What do you put these transmission problems down to?For example, aerials/antennas, TV equipment, location, etc?

Q.8 Do you have much information about the age and condition of antennas in the region?IF YES—discuss where it comes from.

Q.9a What do you see as being the average age, quality and condition of antennas in the region?(Probe for any regional specific issues)

Q.9b Has the introduction of digital services, or the impending cessation of analog, had much impact on the types of domestic antennas used? Probe: What impact is it likely to have in the near future?

Q.9c Do viewers ask the station about digitisation? IF YES—what do they ask?

Q.10 At the present time, what percentage of existing antennas in Bathurst and Orange are likely to fit into the following groups, if digital TV was to be introduced today for all free to air transmission?NOTE: separate out for the two regions if possible.

Q.11 Are there any issue with antennas in the region, such as how they are installed, or adequacy of their location, connections, height, amplifiers, etc? (Note: check location/s)

Q.12 IF YES in Q.11What impact would this have on reception?

Q.13 Let’s assume that all analog transmission is ceased now. Based on what you know about the area/s, what percentage of households in the two areas do you estimate would NOT be able to receive digital TV based on the TV equipment they have?Bathurst ______________________________Orange ______________________________

acma | 98

Appendix EIndustry questionnaire—retailers/installers

April/May 2010ACMA Antennas Audit, Bathurst/Orange

Industry questionnaire—Retailers/installers

Dates: 15 April onwardDetails: Quota of six installers and six suppliers/retailers

INTRODUCTION Good morning / afternoon / evening. My name is ‘…’ from DBM Consultants. We are conducting a project for the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), which is part of the Australian Government.

NOTE: Explain that ACMA is the Australian Communications and Media Authority if asked, and advise that it is the agency responsible for regulating television and radio broadcasting in Australia.

We are conducting an important research project about switching from analog to digital television in the Bathurst and Orange regions.

Does your organisation sell or install household antennas or both?

Install 1 CONTINUEInstall and retail 2 CONTINUERetail only 3 CONTINUENeither 4 TERMINATE

I need to speak to the owner or manager of the business. Is that you?

IF NOT—ASK FOR THAT PERSON AND RE-INTRODUCEWe would like to interview you at your place of work. The interview will cover your experiences with signal quality in the region and with antennas installed/sold. The interview would not take around 30 minutes. In appreciation of your time we will pay you $120.

S.1 Would you like to participate?1 YES - CONTINUE2 BUSY/INCONVENIENT—ARRANGE CALL BACK3 REFUSED/ NOT INTERESTED—THANK AND CLOSE.

IF QUERIED ABOUT THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF THE RESEARCHWe will not attribute anything you tell us to you personally and all information remains confidential. Nothing about your business activities will be revealed to either the ACMA or to other businesses.

99 | acma

IF QUERIED ABOUT THE AUTHENTICITY OF RESEARCHI can email or fax you a letter from ACMA which explains the purpose of the project and who to contact of you want more information.

You can also call the enquiry line at the Australian Market and Social Research Society on 1300 36 4830.

IF ACMA CONTACT/MORE CONTACTS ASKED FORYou may also wish to contact the Project Manager at the ACMA, Dean Martin, on (02) 9334 7743.

CONTINUE IF AGREED:INTERVIEW TIME: |___|___|___|___| AM/PM DATE:

____/____/2010ADDRESS:

__________________________________________________________

CONTACT NO. |___|___|____|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|

NAME AND BUSINESS:

__________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________

Q.1a For how many years have you been selling/installing antennas including satellite dishes in the region?Write in: |___|___|

Q.1b What areas do you cover?Orange/Tablelands only 1Bathurst area only 2Both Orange/Bathurst 3Other areas (specify) 4_________________________________

Q.2a Do you specialise in any type of antennas? IF YES: What type would that be?Probe for UHF, VHF, combination, etcType/s

_________________________________________________________No/do not 2

Q.2b Do certain types of antennas suit particular areas or applications?IF YES: How so?YES 1___________________________________________________

___________________________________________________

acma | 100

No/do not 2

Q.3a During the last 12 months, how many domestic antennas did you sell/install in the Bathurst/Orange region?Write in antennas: |___|___|___|___|

Q.3b What impact has digitisation of television had so far on this number?NOTE: If the number has changed, write in the increase/decrease below.Write in:

_________________________________________________________

Q.4a And how many domestic satellite dishes did you sell/install in the Bathurst/Orange region in the last 12 months?

Write in dishes: |___|___|___|___|

Q.4b Of these, how many would have a subscription to Austar, or free to air services such as Aurora?Austar |___|___|___|___|Aurora/FTA |___|___|___|___|Other comments:___________________________________________________

Q.4c What impact has digitisation of television had so far on the number of satellite dishes installed?NOTE: If the number has changed, write in the increase/decrease below.Write in:

_________________________________________________________

Q.5a Of the total number installed during the last 12 months, what proportion were each of the following:READ OUT EACH CHECK TOTAL ADDS TO 100%

Q.5b In the next year, what proportion of each do you expect to sell/install?READ OUT EACH CHECK TOTAL ADDS TO 100%IF UNSURE, ASK FOR AN ESTIMATE

Q.6 ASK IF CHANGED FROM LAST TO CURRENT YEAR BY ANY EXTENTOTHERS GO TO Q.6Why are your reasons for expecting to sell/install (…more/less…) of (…type...) next year?

Q.7 Of the antennas you have sold/installed over the last year, what percentage of each type would be suitable for digital free to air transmission?

READ OUT EACH CHECK TOTAL ADDS TO 100% IF ALL, WRITE IN 100%

101 | acma

Internal antennas such as rabbit ears or similar |___|___|___|External antennas located in the roof cavity |___|___|___|External antennas that are mounted on the roof |___|___|___|External antennas that are fitted on the ground |___|___|___|Satellite dishes |___|___|___|Other (specify ______________________________ |___|___|___|

Q.8a What are the main brands and models of antennas you mainly sell?Note: Just focus on the most popular.

Q.8b For each, what is the approximate price for the aerial and/or the installation?Note: Accept both if they know

Q.8c FOR EACH BRAND/MODEL what Bands does (...each...) receive?

Q.8d Are some brands/types more popular in certain regions or sub-regions? Why? Which region/s?

Q.9 What are the main reasons behind the popularity of that/those antenna brands/models?

Q.10 What percentage of antennas are replacements for existing antennas or entirely new?Replacement of existing: |___|___|___|Entirely new: |___|___|___|(Don’t know) |___|___|___|

Q.11a When existing antennas are replaced, how often are the old antennas removed or disconnected?Removed: ________________________Disconnected but not removed: ________________________Neither/left as is: ________________________(Don’t know) ________________________

Q.11b What are the main reasons why existing antennas are replaced?Note: Ask the approximate proportion for main reasons—distinguish between interference and poor reception and replacement of TV with switch to digital.Poor reception quality ________________________Interference ________________________Upgraded TV/ new TV ________________________Switching to digital TV ________________________Damaged/broken ________________________Other reason/s ________________________(Specify)_____________________________________________________(Don’t know) ________________________

acma | 102

Q.12 Who generally picks the antenna, you, the customer, or both?Note: If both, check the role played by customers.

Q.13 Is poor reception quality more prevalent in some places/areas?IF YES: What area/places receive poor reception? Why?

Q.14 Approximately how old is existing antennas when they are replaced?Note: Get best estimate of unsure—make note if it varies by type/brand etc.

Q.15 What do you consider to be a normal life expectancy for antennas?Note: At what age do they deteriorate under normal conditions? (i.e. noticeable difference in reception).

Q.16 Are existing antennas ever repaired?IF YES—Under what circumstances? How often?

Q.17 What can be done to existing antennas when they give poor reception and interference, other than replacing them?

IF NOT MENTIONEDWhich of the following would be recommend/do to fix it?Now ask percentages.Replace cabling |___|___|___| %Fit masthead amplifier |___|___|___| %Install taller mast |___|___|___| %Move/turn the antenna |___|___|___| %(None) |___|___|___| %

Q.18 How often is the existing antenna fixed compared to replacing the antenna?Fixed |___|___|___| %Replaced |___|___|___| %

Q.19 How often per month would you….READ OUT—GET AN ANSWER FOR EACHFit a new masthead amplifier________________________________Install a taller mast than the existing mast________________________________Replace the cabling and connections________________________________

Q20 Approximately how tall are the new masts that you sell/install?And how tall would the old masts be?New masts: ______________________Old/replaced masts ______________________

Q.21 Are customers aware that television will soon be changing from analog to digital?Note: Check what proportion is aware/ not aware.

Q.22 What questions (if any) do they ask you regarding digital transmission?(For example, do they check if the antenna will suit digital TV?

103 | acma

Q.23a At the current time, what proportion of households in Bathurst and Orange area would have the following:DIGITAL television/s |___|___|___| %Analog TVs with a digital top box |___|___|___| %Analog TVs with a digital DVD recorder |___|___|___| %No digital capability |___|___|___| %

Q.23b What percentage would have Pay TV in the Bathurst and Orange area?Write in: |___|___|___| %

Q.24 At the present time, what percentage of existing antennas in Bathurst and Orange are likely to fit into the following groups if digital TV was to be introduced today for all free to air transmission?Adequate (could receive it no problem) |___|___|___| %Marginal (some ability to receive digital) |___|___|___| %Inadequate (no effective digital reception) |___|___|___| %

Q.25 Can you elaborate on how you arrived at these figures?

Q.26a Where are problems with reception most likely to arise in the area?

Q.26b And what are likely to be the main problems in that/those areas?

Q.27 What information would you like to receive from the Government regarding the change to digital television in the Bathurst/Orange area?WRITE IN:

Q28 How would you prefer information to be provided? WRITE IN:

Descriptive Data

D.1 How would you describe the structure of your business? READ OUT IF NECESSARYPublic company 1 CONTINUEPrivate company 2 CONTINUEPartnership 3 CONTINUESole trader 4 GO TO D.3Other (specify) __________________________ 5 CONTINUEDon’t know 6 GO TO D.3

D.2 How many people (full time equivalents) work in the business?Write in: |___|___|___|

D.3 And is the business…….. READ OUTA standalone company 1Part of a franchise chain or group 2Other (specify) __________________________ 3Don’t know 4

D.4 Is your main business… READ OUT ACCEPT MULTIPLESWholesaling 1Retailing 2Installing—being the primary contractor 3Installing as a sub-contractor 4

acma | 104

ENDS Inform them that they may be called back for Q&A/likely to take no more than 1-2 minutes

105 | acma

domestic antenna systems - estimating current stock/media/research and analysis... · web viewyagi...

Documents