David Frackelton Gleason aka Eduardo the fake Hispanic from Cleveland wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
om...

[snip]

Most listening is NOT to AM anymore. Why not accept tha tthis may be
an
opportunity to make AM move viable for the future?


[snip]

So, how does the future of AM radio differ if nighttime IBOC is
approved
or
not?

The quality is vastly better and can attract listeners for a change.

And QRM the adjacent channels to boot. Such a deal for you bean counters.

Actually, I am a programmer and a pretty good one.

That's debatable. If I recall correctly, I've heard some of the stuff you claim
to be responsible for and it sucks.

I am in favor of
anything that extends the life of AM radio or terrestrial radio in general.
The consumer, too, should be in favor of this as commercial-based radio is
free, and every other option has ongoing delivery charges.

There's nothing 'free' about the IBOC QRM destroying two adjacent channels.

dxAce
Michigan
USA