On Feb 15, 5:58�pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"IBOCcrock" wrote in message

...
On Feb 15, 3:15?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:





"IBOCcrock" wrote in message

...
. The sheer capital

cost of the power increase (if approved) will be staggering
considering most of the current hardware and ancillary equipment will
have to be replaced."

"Where robust in reach, radio is an ailing medium that is undergoing
yet another adjustment to bring expenses inline with revised revenue;
so another big outlay in capital is not likely.

Of all the former 1 A clear channels, WSM is the lowest in billing and the
lowest in market rank. It exists only as a promotion for the Gaylord
enterprises in Nashville, as its ratings place it 14th in the market, and
in
billings it is 22nd per a reputable source. For most viable stations in
the
top 100 markets, the cost of upgrading to new HD gear is small, and is a
depreciable capital expense item, not a cost. Dogs like WSM will find it
hard to manage, but that is because they are not successful radio
stations.

Costs to upgrade run from $100,000 to $600,000 - not small.

For a non directional, single tower operation, the costs are at the very low
end.

Plus, the
on-going licensing and HD channel royalty fees.

There is on annual fee for an AM.

Plus, the new 10db
power increase, if approved, will be staggering, as most equipment
will need replacing.

That is for FM. And the costs are relatively minor... many existing FM HD
transmitters can increase power with module increases. "Most" is an absurd
word to use. Generally, only the PA part of the HD transmitter will be
replaced... the rest of most systems are robust enough, as they handle the
analog power which is much greater.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Not minor, when all of the major broadcasters stocks are down 90% -
for AM, the costs are even greater!