On Sep 3, 12:59 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

ups.com...





On Sep 3, 12:44 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

oups.com...

Sounds like you've finally matured a bit and now see the merits of FM
and the folly of HD-AM. Congratulations.

Quite the contrary. It has been known by broadcasters for some time that
there is no way to get any significant number of listeners under 55 to
tune
to AM, and the average age of AM listeners is increasing each year as a
consequence.

Some AMs have moved to FM. Others are simulcasting. Others have no FM to
move to, and are slowly losing revenue.

Those AMs have, perhaps, some chance to survive via HD. Otherwise, AM
will
be pretty much a thing of the past and only relevant or viable for very
niche formats or in some rural areas where there are no local FMs. Of
course, this is not an immediate do or die type thing; HD can develop
over
the next few years and AMs can attempt to restore some interest among
under-55s via the improved quality.

Lol. You are such a throw back. You will never lure young people away
their iPods, their cellphones and their myspace pages. I suggest you
quickly return your head to it's usual, sandy resting place. You're
fighting a battle that was lost twenty years ago.

In the case of AM news and talk programming, the potential audience is
almost entirely 35 and over; AM is losing the 35-50 year olds due to the
dreadful sound quality, ambient noise levels in big cities, directional AMs
that "go away" at night in many parts of metros, etc.

These listeners will use the news and talk formats if delivered in a better
quality... FM or HD.

As to youth, 96% of 12-24 year olds use radio. Less than before? Yes. But
radio is still a very viable means to reach young adult demographics.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yeah, you keep dreaming. I hear that record albums are also going to
make a comeback. lol