Garrett Wollman wrote in message
...
In article ,
H Glazer wrote:
I link Internet radio just as much as the next guy, and I'm glad to
see more stations returning to cyberspace, but I'm still wondering
how broadcasters hope to recover the costs of streaming.

I think the logic goes something like this:

- If few people listen, then it doesn't cost very much, and we make a
few of our P1s happer because they can get the station in their
offices, which helps to build brand loyalty.

- If lots of people listen, we can sell that.


Yeah, but they'll be trying to sell that to the advertising agencies they
deal with, who know full well (I would think) that their AFTRA-talent-voiced
ads aren't being heard by any of that burgeoning number of Internet
listeners. People who listen to WBZ in the office, most likely, already
listen to WBZ in their cars. Brand loyalty has already been built. The only
really new listeners WBZ stands to gain are the out-of-market ones that
Boston-based advertisers don't care if they reach, even if the stream wasn't
scrubbed. Are Sullivan Tire, Giant Glass, or whoever, really going to pay
more because 'BZ is now being heard online by people who can't hear their
ads?

Howard