ndsets had less power available than base stations, it was usual to provide some additional link budget gain on the uplink. A typical cell site might provide for example 17 dB gain on the uplink using diversity and/or dual polarisation antennas and 9 dB of gain on the (sectored) downlink. Similarly in the access network, the A bis and Gb interface was designed to support symmet- ric bidirectional (largely duplex voice-based) traffic. In contrast, digital broadcast networks used (and still use) ATM to deliver a one way traffic multiplex that is (completely) asymmet- ric and highly asynchronous (variable rate). The Rel 99 air interface addressed this issue by introducing an ATM-based radio layer (10-millisecond frame-based admission control) and an ATM-based radio access and core network. The debate, however, then moved to focus on the future role of IP in broadcast networks. DVB-H for example was explicitly being positioned as an IP-based broadcast system solution. This meant that the IP subsystem at the transport layer had to behave at least as predictably as an ATM-based transport layer, or in other words, the IP subsystem had to replicate ATM end-to-end functionality (the ability to control a complex multiplex in the time domain). This was not something that IP networks were ever designed to do. The integration of flexible network bandwidth provisioning and QOS based broadcasting was particularly challenging and needed to encompass transport and network design, server architectures and performance and content management systems. In 2007 at the annual GSM World Congress trade show, mobile TV was everywhere. By 2011 it had all but disappeared. Is mobile TV dead or dormant and how will the success or failure of portable TV over the next few years impact the mobile TV offer? Apart from users not wanting it, mobile TV market adoption has been frustrated by multiple standards illustrated by the muddle described above and a failure to harmonise spectrum on a regional and national basis. These together mean that scale 