"Steve" wrote in message
ps.com...

David Eduardo wrote:


Every alternative costs more than an HD radio. Radio stays viable as a
free
medium, the listener gets more channels and the price of receivers will
come
down. And the analog signal will not be going away any time soon.

It will cost more to broadcasters. We would not do it if it did not
protect
the future and enhance revenue. It is a business.

You don't read these comments very closely, do you Tardo? At least half
a dozen posters have answered every one of the above points, but you
didn't even READ their posts.

No, no body has answered the points. They have complained and put out
information that is false.

1. There is a marked improvement in AM quality on HD, making it comparable
to analog FM.
2. FM HD offers additional free channels.
3. The listener does not pay for HD.
4. The listener pays for satellite radio.
5. The lsitener pays for delivery for streaming, wifi, WiMax, etc.
6. There is no other band available for digital in the US.
7. Any change in delivery requires new radios, whether satellite, broadband
or whatever.
8. HD is just beginning its consumer marketing, so it is early to expect
reasonably priced radios.
9. All new consumer electronics start at high prices: CD, DVD, TV, Cellular,
etc.
10. There is hardly any listening to out of market signals.
11. AM will not survive without some "tonic" to revive its relevancy among
listeners advertisers want to reach.
12. AM for under-45 listeners is already dead.
13. The "Digital" term is very important to a large mass of consumers.