I recall the same rumors, and UHF was being tested in the very hilly mountain valley where I live. Having some knowledge of signal propagation I was hoping that they would stay on VHF. I really thought that moving to UHF would have resulted in a great loss of coverage area, and would have required an increase in power. The major broadcasters here did move back to VHF. Two of them moved from low VHF to high VHF one of them stayed put on channel 10. Less power is needed to cover the same area using ATSC signals, more power is needed to cover the same area using UHF. The cut in power after the transition was excessive an increase in VHF power levels is needed. How well UHF low power translators work in my area came as a complete surprise to me. I can step out the door with a UHF loop and easily receive 300 watt translators from 30 miles away. Line of sight is required. I do not believe that would have been possible with NTSC signals. There are those who predict that with current spectrum grab money/politics there will be some return to low VHF broadcasting at higher power levels. I feel the major obstacles to low VHF are house hold RFI levels, and antenna size at those frequencies. I've always loved antennas, and have a bit of a problem with the current antenna phobia that has swept our country. I grew up at a time when a big TV antenna was a sign of prosperity. There are antenna manufactures that sprang up at about transition time that still have trouble facing the reality that VHF antennas are needed in the majority of US television markets.