David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
What I'm seeing, is interest in HD-AM by users who are interested in AM
content, and who regularly use AM anyway. But little or no interest in
users who do not regularly use AM. Regardless of the audio quality....if
there is no interest in the programming, there will be little interest in
how good it may or may not sound.

Viscious circle there... until there is an audio quality that under-45's can
tolerate, there will be no programming. And as the clock ticks, the band
dies.


Well, of course it's a vicious circle. Most everything in Radio is.
You remember how tough it is to get hired until you have experience, but
you can't get experience until you get hired. Vicious circles in Radio
aren't news. But the fact remains.

That said, it's content that drives listening. If the content is of
no interest to the target, HD isn't going to help. What's not
happening, is there's no change in content to accompany HD
implementation. WGN didn't change content when HD was installed. And I'm
sure that Ace will point out that WBBM's content is the same as before
HD was installed. So, HD is only really benefitting those who are
already using AM. And those younger demos you wish to attract with audio
quality, will be just as unintersted in the content after HD, as the
stations themselves are in those who listen outside of the city grade
contour.





The only potential uptick I see is in those auto systems where HD is
included as a standard feature. Sampling of HD, at that point, would be a
natural extension of radio sampling in general...playing with a new radio
in a new car is fairly commonplace. See what it sounds like, on both
bands...even if only to set the presets...there's still sampling going on.
In that context, HD may get a fair hearing, and perhaps some encouraging
acceptance.

That is exactly what will be the make-or-break as to AM. FM is healthy. It
will become healthier with HD 2 channels. It can potentially drage AM back
into the game. This is why none of the big operators has sold a viable AM in
years... all believe the value will be enhanced by HD. That is a
many-billion-dollar gamble.



That's exactly my point...it's a gamble. A crap shoot. Targeting the
superficiality and subjective perception of audio quality. While the
real attraction to listening is content.

You've noted growth at your AM's on the West Coast. Those are due to
content, not audio quality. And your growth has exceeded expectations.
Whether HD has been implemented or not, HD's 'improved' audio quality is
not a factor, since receiving hardware is both expensive and not widely
available. In fact, your share increase would exceed the number of HD
radios sold in those markets were explosive growth has taken place. IF
HD audio is not a factor, it's the content that's attracting listeners.
In under 45 demo's at that.

However, HD is putting that content off limits to potential
listeners, by trashing the bands in weak signal areas with other
station's HD rash. If noise and audio quality are, indeed, factors
keeping AM from stable growth, or at least stable levels of
listenership, increasing noise found in HD sidebands is not going to be
a viable solution.



So, as with most radio techological innovations, it's going to have to be
in the cars in order to expose that captive audience to a fair hearing of
HD-AM for an interest to be generated. (This, despite the fact that a
majority of listening is not in cars.) But for those listeners who would
have to actively pursue an HD experience without current regular AM
usage...I'm not seeing it.

Cars are where Americans are forced to get a new radio. Obviously, there is
a trickle down aspect, as not everyone buys new cars (ever) and not everyone
buys a new car every year or two. But this is the opportunity for AM. It is
not an overnighter, but the band is fading, not exploding.
So far, you've been talking about how the stations love HD-AM. You and
I know that the success of any radio station is found in listener centric
product and behaviour. The point that radio stations love HD-AM is
unimportant. It's the listener's embrace that matters. And outside of
controlled demostrations, there is nothing to suggest that there is more
interest in HD-AM than in C-Quam. And the jury will be out for some time
to come.

We are years away from being able to evaluate listener response, which will
be based on product demand. But the few reports that have started coming in
are favorable. On the FM side, we put a Tejano format on last week ont he
KLTN HD2 channel, and we have registered several hundred calls (the format
is on a marginal AM as well) asking about how to buy radios and all were
very excited. This, perhaps and even hopefully will rub off on AM.


Then, again, if audio quality is really an issue, that same Tejano
format on HD2, since HD radios must resolve both AM and FM HD, will
present an attraction of listeners away from the AM station, even if
listening is done in AM HD.

So, the net advantage to AM, here is zero where the same content is
available on FM, analog or digital.

As you said, that makes AM HD an enormous gamble. And an expensive
buy-in to the game.