In article , Lobster
writes
Big Bill wrote:

Your local riggers have to pay for advertising, a van, loads of
insurance, somewhere to store the gear etc. etc. Plus they have enough
experience, often hard-won, to handle problems when they come up
against them. If it was dead easy, people couldn't make a living out
of it. Like a lot of things, really.

Of course, no complaints with that. I wasn't querying the cost of their
labour/expertise, it was whether the digital aerial which they were
suggesting was (a) justified and (b) genuinely cost about 50 quid more
than the analogue equivalent. From what others have said it sounds like
that's a 'yes' on both fronts.

David

Try posting over on uk.tech.digital.tv where this argument is known
to rage on a bit;;.

A digital aerial is more expensive than an analogue one because the
public perceives it as such... otherwise their much the same thing..

A bit of marketing bollokx for the aerial rigging trade;=-!!
--
Tony Sayer