Mark Zenier wrote:
In article ,
David wrote:
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:11:05 GMT, (Mark Zenier)
wrote:
In article ,
David wrote:
You can get the World Service, in hifi digital sound, 24 hours a day
on XM satellite radio. The equipment is under $100.
I bought my R-1000 on closeout for $300 about 22 years ago.
How much will a 22 year subscription to XM cost?
Mark Zenier Washington State resident
You get what you pay for. You can get the BBC for what...3 or 4 hours
a day (if the Sun ain't flaking out)?
Let's see. 15360 is good for a couple of hours in the dead of night,
then 6195 and 9740 give another four or five starting about four in
the morning, then 7160 can be listenable until 10 AM PDT, then then
15280 or 15360 in the late afternoon for a couple, then the two or
three hours targeted to the Americas on 5975, 7160 and 15360 again,
then KOAC-550 starting about 10 PM or so, and the local FMs at 1 AM.
So probably 16 hours a day, of varying quality.
The BBC uses 9825 at 0200-0300 daily to broadcast The World Today.
15280/15360 usually fades out by 0300.
Do you really care about the BBC
Their current events feature stuff and the science programs, yes.
(The ones the local NPR stations will never run because they don't' want
to look bad in comparison). I find I'm caring less and less about the
rest as they degenerate down to a "BBCNN" (as some writer to "Write On"
called them last week) news (froth) service. (And they seem to have
followed the party line on the Iraq war). When they shut down their
science unit, I'm gone. But that's not the point.
I listen for their current events. I listen to The World Today and
that's about it. I find that they have a lot of on the scene reporters
that other news services don't have. What American journalist can report
directly from Havana or Tehran or some of those chaotic African
countries?
CRI is the one trying to be "radio CNN" except they're more like a
Communist version of Fox News.
or are you just trying to be special because you make do with an
obsolete delivery system?
But the main point here is that XM or "Are you Serious?" are just not
cost effective. Spending 10-13? dollars a month for the 1 1/2 channels
that I'd be interested in just doesn't pay off. All I'd care about
is BBC or WRN, NPR to fill in what my local stations censor, maybe a
alternative music or blues channel when I'm in the mood. But for $150
a year? $3000 + inflation + equipment costs over the next 20some years?
The receivers are 100-200 (subsidized) bucks and will probably break
down in 5-7 years as they run some their circuitry pretty hot. And the
providers themselves have shaky finances. Will they be around in a
few years? (Especially when it's time for new satellites to be launched).
They're just a part of the dot.com boom that hasn't burned through their
cash yet. Don't get too dependent on them.
I wonder what will happen to all those cars that have XM built in. I was
looking at new Mazdas the other day and even the economy cars have XM. I
guess those unlucky owners will have to go back to FM.
Finally you're at the whims of the few who select which channels
get broadcast in their limited bandwidth. Some new radio fad or
some pressure campaign by some right wing group, and "goodby BBC".
("Market forces will provide what you want", my ass).
It's funny that David seems to be so concerned with the govt taking away
SW radios, yet he's so bullish on XM. The government, which has a big
stake in satellite radio, could simply order (or pressure) the services
to stop carrying certain channels. Satellite is big NOW, but just wait a
few years when their birds go dead. Then suddenly they'll vanish, and
David will have to break out the R75 again.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----