"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. net...

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message

AM underindexes FM at night. In other words, a higher percentage of
night
listening is to FM than in the daytime. Part of this is the night
interference on most AM channels,a nd the additional interference
coming
from home electronics. HD at night would give AM the ability to compete
better at night by those stations with decent signals, which leaves out
about 75% of all AMs anyway.



But FM loses most of thier listeners at night. AM underindexes that.
So,
at best, AM might lose only the same percentage of audience as FM.

No, if AM has 30% of all radio listening in the day, it has 15% at night.

I'm not clear on what I'm wrong about. Doesn't FM also lose most of their
listeners, in absolute numbers (not percentage) during the night? What are
those numbers?


Would the new, improved nighttime IBOC AM stations be luring listeners
from
other distractions such as TV and the internet, or would they just be
stealing audience from the non-IBOC AM stations and FM stations?

I have no idea, as we don ot know where they go. But if the big AMs get
decent daytime numbers, it is possible they will keep thse shares at
night.

But, if the entire radio industry is really, really facing an impending
doom, redistributing the audience is little different than rearranging
the
deck chairs on the ...

there is no short term danger. Radio is pretty resilient. HD is one
example
of how we come up with ways of protecting our franchises. I have seen
45's,
cassettes, 8-tracks, CDs, VHS, BetaMax, CATV, HDTV, Video games, pay per
view, DVDs, computers, the Internet, and plenty more come, and some go. I
think I can survive one or two more attacks before going to live among the
pine trees in Arizona.



Agreed. Radio is pretty resilent. And there will always somebody who wants
to get on the air, even if there isn't big money in it anymore.

Frank Dresser