| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
WBRW wrote:
For better or worse, the IBOC/"HD Radio" digital AM system is currently only approved for daytime use. After sunset I will have to check if WPAT resumes broadcasting a full-bandwidth AM Stereo signal or not. The official sunset time is 8:30 PM, at which point WPAT's digital signal has to be shut off, per FCC rules. It's 10:30 PM and WPAT is not in stereo, and still sounds bad. I live in Oradell NJ, exit 165 off the GSP. |
snipped for a smaller response
"WBRW" wrote in message ... New Jersey's longest-running AM Stereo station, 930 WPAT in Paterson, is now the first in the state -- and the second in the New York City area -- to begin testing iBiquity's IBOC/"HD Radio" digital AM system. Also, the digital data sidebands -- that now extend all the way from 915 through 945 kHz on the dial -- will now cause a constant "hash" or loud static type of noise to nearby channels such as 910, 920, 940, and 950 kHz, as well as a constant hiss in the background of 930 WPAT's own signal. At my location in Somerset County, NJ, I hear WPAT's digital signal causing a constant hiss in the background of 910 WRKL and 950 WPEN, as well a loud "hash" on 920 kHz that severely degrades my reception of otherwise perfectly clear WPHY, to the point where WPHY's signal is only marginally intelligible. The "hash" on the other side of WPAT's signal also prevents any chance of being able to receive 940 WADV. IMHO this confirms what many of us believed from the beginning; IBOC is incompatible with analog AM. When HD stations start stepping on local AM second-adjacents, the time has come to re-think IBOC. P.S.: read again "as well as a constant hiss in the background of 930 WPAT's own signal." There is no better proof that AM-IBOC is incompatible with regular AM radios. |
With WOR I was unable to tell what the IBOC signal sounded like
because their signal was so strong I could receive it on my teeth. WPAT is far weaker and I hear the same thing you hear from 910 to 950. On my receivers it sounds like square waves and buzzing on either side. Hash lower and buzzing upper. Beyond 960 all is quiet so it isn't dimmer or power line noise. If you can't get enough of WPAT's noise-generating IBOC signal, try 1480 WZRC. As of 2:00 PM on Thursday afternoon, the IBOC was turned on at that NYC station as well. Listeners of 1500 WGHT -- whose transmitter is only 17 miles away from WZRC's -- will definitely not be pleased when they tune in 1500 AM and hear a constant "HISSSSSSSS" in the background. Yes, IBOC is currently daytime-only -- but so is WGHT itself (to accomodate WTOP at night), so there's no escape! Furthermore, 930 WPAT is a hodge-podge of time-brokered ethnic programming, and 1480 WZRC is all-Chinese. Exactly what is the point of broadcasting these zero-ratings, zero-advertiser, zero-listener formats in IBOC digital?? And as for 710 WOR, most of its 85-year-old listeners probably don't even know what "digital" means. Regardless of its technical flaws, IBOC might have a chance if they put it on something like Radio Disney (1560 WQEW), as an attempt to attract more younger listeners to the AM band. Otherwise, it's just being wasted on the type of listeners who haven't bought a new radio since 1974. |
Otherwise, it's just being wasted on the type of listeners who haven't bought a new radio since 1974. Gee, isn't 1974 the official date when they stopped making real AM radios and jammed everything into one 50 cent IC ? |
Gegroet,
Op Sat, 19 Jul 2003 19:33:02 +0000, schreef Charles Hobbs: There is no better proof that AM-IBOC is incompatible with regular AM radios. How would DRM (as tested on the shortwave bands) fare? Well, there's an very interested website concerning this in New Zealand: http://www.owdjim.gen.nz/chris/radio/DRM/DRM.html Scroll down to the reception-results to "2003/06/02 03:50". There's an audio-sample of a DRM signal and a AM signal. But do note: - The DRM signal was a signal from the BBC from the transmittor-site of RCI of shackville; aimed at North America. - The person who did the recording lives in New Zealand. (which is pretty far of for a broadcast from Canada into North America). - The AM broadcast came from Turkey; althou I don't know where it was aimed. (apparently, according the scedule of the VOT; it was in Turkish; so it could be directed anywhere). So the question is of the person would -otherwize, if this would have been two AM broadcasts, been able to receive anything anyway. It's a bit difficult to compair local MW broadcasting with long-distance SW. Cheerio! Kr. Bonne. -- Kristoff Bonne, Bredene [nl] [fr] [en] [de] |
"WBRW" wrote in message ... Furthermore, 930 WPAT is a hodge-podge of time-brokered ethnic programming, and 1480 WZRC is all-Chinese. Exactly what is the point of broadcasting these zero-ratings, zero-advertiser, zero-listener formats in IBOC digital?? And as for 710 WOR, most of its 85-year-old listeners probably don't even know what "digital" means. Forgot to add: the average listenerer age for all stations combined in NY is 41; the average age for WZRC is 38; for WPAT it is 46. Regardless of its technical flaws, IBOC might have a chance if they put it on something like Radio Disney (1560 WQEW), as an attempt to attract more younger listeners to the AM band. Otherwise, it's just being wasted on the type of listeners who haven't bought a new radio since 1974. |
"Charles Hobbs" wrote in message ... Drewdawg wrote: snipped for a smaller response "WBRW" wrote in message ... New Jersey's longest-running AM Stereo station, 930 WPAT in Paterson, is now the first in the state -- and the second in the New York City area -- to begin testing iBiquity's IBOC/"HD Radio" digital AM system. Also, the digital data sidebands -- that now extend all the way from 915 through 945 kHz on the dial -- will now cause a constant "hash" or loud static type of noise to nearby channels such as 910, 920, 940, and 950 kHz, as well as a constant hiss in the background of 930 WPAT's own signal. At my location in Somerset County, NJ, I hear WPAT's digital signal causing a constant hiss in the background of 910 WRKL and 950 WPEN, as well a loud "hash" on 920 kHz that severely degrades my reception of otherwise perfectly clear WPHY, to the point where WPHY's signal is only marginally intelligible. The "hash" on the other side of WPAT's signal also prevents any chance of being able to receive 940 WADV. IMHO this confirms what many of us believed from the beginning; IBOC is incompatible with analog AM. When HD stations start stepping on local AM second-adjacents, the time has come to re-think IBOC. P.S.: read again "as well as a constant hiss in the background of 930 WPAT's own signal." There is no better proof that AM-IBOC is incompatible with regular AM radios. How would DRM (as tested on the shortwave bands) fare? Glad you asked :-) as I've proposed this on alt.radio.digital as IBAC-DRM (in-band adjacent channel). If WOR were to stop IBOC and switch to IBAC-DRM at 720 I believe only that channel (720) would be affected, 700 would be untouched, 690 & 730 would be completely unaffected and, my guess would be, 710 would continue on at 10kHz without any hash on existing AM radios. If today's situation is acceptable they could go dual-mode and do another DRM at 700, giving them the fidelity heard on www.drm.org on their 40kbit samples. Again, IMHO, same impact on 700 & 720, none on 690 & 730 and normal AM on 710. However, I'm not an engineer and I could be wrong. Sorry if I am but please point out where I am. I'm curious as to how this would be worse than IBOC. |
"WBRW" wrote in message
... Furthermore, 930 WPAT is a hodge-podge of time-brokered ethnic programming, and 1480 WZRC is all-Chinese. Furthermore, WPAT is highly profitable, and the programs serve specialized communities that may have no other source for such programming. Under this "hodge podge" standard, every TV station in America qualifies; different programs for different folks at different times of the day. It is just block programming. It was also radio's model during its first 30 years. Exactly what is the point of broadcasting these zero-ratings, zero-advertiser, zero-listener formats in IBOC digital?? You are saying Chinese speakers are less likely to be interested in improved audio quality than non-Chinese. Or are you saying they are less deserving? Less worth? BTW, most of the brokered shows on these stations are chock full of local commercials for community stores, busniesses and services. Such formats don't show in ratings mostly because Arbityron has no Asian interviewers and does not do ethnic weighting for Asians. The staitons have listeners, advertisers and high billings. And as for 710 WOR, most of its 85-year-old listeners probably don't even know what "digital" means. You are off by 26 years. WOR's average age is 59. WABC's average age is 54 and WCBS-AM's is 52. I happen to be somewhere in that range and digital is very interesting to me. And to many contemporaries I know. Regardless of its technical flaws, IBOC might have a chance if they put it on something like Radio Disney (1560 WQEW), as an attempt to attract more younger listeners to the AM band. Again, it appears you are saiying that Asina listeners are of no value, or are undiscriminating in taste or unsophisticated. Which is it? Otherwise, it's just being wasted on the type of listeners who haven't bought a new radio since 1974. I bought my last one, oh, 3 weeks ago. It is a combined digital recorder, digital playback and AM FM radio with a computer interface for storing MP3's recorded off the air. A scaled version is being readied for marketing to Rush listeners who want to record and listen later; the average age of them is about 57. So much for your theories about technology. You are talking about the generation that grew up with the first transistor radios, avidly took to the cassette medium and rapidly gravitated to VHS, CD's, and DVDs. |
i cannot believe that it is allowed (fcc rules?) to disturb the regular reception of other AM stations in the locality! why do they let this happen? "Drewdawg" wrote in message ... "Charles Hobbs" wrote in message ... Drewdawg wrote: snipped for a smaller response "WBRW" wrote in message ... New Jersey's longest-running AM Stereo station, 930 WPAT in Paterson, is now the first in the state -- and the second in the New York City area -- to begin testing iBiquity's IBOC/"HD Radio" digital AM system. Also, the digital data sidebands -- that now extend all the way from 915 through 945 kHz on the dial -- will now cause a constant "hash" or loud static type of noise to nearby channels such as 910, 920, 940, and 950 kHz, as well as a constant hiss in the background of 930 WPAT's own signal. At my location in Somerset County, NJ, I hear WPAT's digital signal causing a constant hiss in the background of 910 WRKL and 950 WPEN, as well a loud "hash" on 920 kHz that severely degrades my reception of otherwise perfectly clear WPHY, to the point where WPHY's signal is only marginally intelligible. The "hash" on the other side of WPAT's signal also prevents any chance of being able to receive 940 WADV. IMHO this confirms what many of us believed from the beginning; IBOC is incompatible with analog AM. When HD stations start stepping on local AM second-adjacents, the time has come to re-think IBOC. P.S.: read again "as well as a constant hiss in the background of 930 WPAT's own signal." There is no better proof that AM-IBOC is incompatible with regular AM radios. How would DRM (as tested on the shortwave bands) fare? Glad you asked :-) as I've proposed this on alt.radio.digital as IBAC-DRM (in-band adjacent channel). If WOR were to stop IBOC and switch to IBAC-DRM at 720 I believe only that channel (720) would be affected, 700 would be untouched, 690 & 730 would be completely unaffected and, my guess would be, 710 would continue on at 10kHz without any hash on existing AM radios. If today's situation is acceptable they could go dual-mode and do another DRM at 700, giving them the fidelity heard on www.drm.org on their 40kbit samples. Again, IMHO, same impact on 700 & 720, none on 690 & 730 and normal AM on 710. However, I'm not an engineer and I could be wrong. Sorry if I am but please point out where I am. I'm curious as to how this would be worse than IBOC. .. |
Furthermore, 930 WPAT is a hodge-podge of time-brokered ethnic programming, and 1480 WZRC is all-Chinese. Don't forget that the New York Metropolitan area often has more people of a particular ethnic group than their naive counties have. The WPATs of the world are the only place where they can find programming that speaks to them. They lost their major outlet (WEVD) to make room for the third all sports station in the city. New York has a larger Chinese population than most cities have people. I believe WZRC is Korean. It was a tremendous improvement in the cultural life of the city. The only sports figure I've seen who makes any sense is Yogi Berra. "When you see a fork in the road, take it." How can you go wrong with that? If you were to see a man on the street patting his male companion on the butt, what would you think? If you saw one of them bent over with the other with his hands between his companion's legs, what would you think? There are no women around. Yet we spend billions to watch allegedly heterosexual men do the same thing on TV. Strange. Rich |
"Ron Hardin" wrote in message
... The FCC has an official modulation type for dimmer noise, A6 or something. As a format it manages about a 2.3 share if you don't pack it with too many commercials. -- Dimmer noise has more listeners than Imus does (not that difficult to achieve, now that I think about it) ---- and certainly is much more entertaining. |
Don't forget that the New York Metropolitan area often has more people
of a particular ethnic group than their naive counties have. That must be why we have TWO stations with primarily Russian-language programming (620 WSNR & 1380 WKDM), and if you count a simulcast, TWO stations with all-Polish programming (910 WRKL & 1580 WLIM). But yet, the nation's #1 music format, Country, does not exist on the air within 50 miles of NYC. Yes, yes, yes, people say that there simply aren't that many country music fans within the City itself, and they're correct -- but any decent NYC-area signal will cover plenty of the surrounding suburban areas were there *are* many country fans. "Y-107" proved this, with its lousy-ass signal getting better ratings -- even within the NYC market itself -- than what "Barbie Radio" is getting on a full-power heritage NYC FM station. They lost their major outlet (WEVD) to make room for the third all sports station in the city. Well, *second* all-sports station, since 620 WSNR is now only "Sporting Radio News" when it feels like it. (Strange, but true -- a "flagship" station that doesn't carry its own network's programming most of the time.) If you were to see a man on the street patting his male companion on the butt, what would you think? If you saw one of them bent over with the other with his hands between his companion's legs, what would you think? There are no women around. Yet we spend billions to watch allegedly heterosexual men do the same thing on TV. Umm... not that I disagree with you, but what does this have to do with radio? However, since you got me thinking, could this be the reason why soccer has never been popular in America... because it's not homoerotic enough? :-) Strange. ....but true. |
keep-it-clean wrote:
The FCC has an official modulation type for dimmer noise, A6 or something. As a format it manages about a 2.3 share if you don't pack it with too many commercials. -- Dimmer noise has more listeners than Imus does (not that difficult to achieve, now that I think about it) ---- and certainly is much more entertaining. Not around me. When a neighbor installs a dimmer, I offer to buy him a better one. The upscale Lutron stuff ($30 and up, not their cheaper stuff) has enough filtering stages to suppress RFI in a neighbor's house. Installed in your own house, they're still detectable on the AM band. I also buy touch lamps. -- Ron Hardin On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk. |
In article , WBRW wrote:
Well, *second* all-sports station, since 620 WSNR is now only "Sporting Radio News" when it feels like it. (Strange, but true -- a "flagship" station that doesn't carry its own network's programming most of the time.) Word on the street is that Paul Allen is desperate to find a greater fool to take the station off his hands. That's why they're brokering it out -- it wasn't making them anything running SNR, and they want to get it billing *something* in order to get a decent sale price. (Is Arthur Liu full up yet?) I think the last SNR O&O that is still running SNR programming full-time is WWZN Boston, and rumors are swirling over programming changes there, too. (And Boston probably costs as much to run as Newark does, thanks to some poor decisions made by a previous Greater Fool.) -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | As the Constitution endures, persons in every | generation can invoke its principles in their own Opinions not those of| search for greater freedom. MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - A. Kennedy, Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. ___ (2003) |
|
"Garrett Wollman" wrote in message ... In article , WBRW wrote: Well, *second* all-sports station, since 620 WSNR is now only "Sporting Radio News" when it feels like it. (Strange, but true -- a "flagship" station that doesn't carry its own network's programming most of the time.) Word on the street is that Paul Allen is desperate to find a greater fool to take the station off his hands. That's why they're brokering it out -- it wasn't making them anything running SNR, and they want to get it billing *something* in order to get a decent sale price. Below certain billing levels, the value of stations like this is based, like lobsters in a restaurant, on "makret price." No sane person would keep the current programming, so billing is not material. The old day formula of 2.5 times billig or 8-10 times BCF are long gone. Example: inferior, basin-floor limited Class B KFSG (now KXOL-FM) in LA with no billing and a must-change format: $250 million. |
"David Eduardo" wrote in message =
... =20 Below certain billing levels, the value of stations like this is = based, like lobsters in a restaurant, on "makret price." No sane person would keep = the current programming, so billing is not material. The old day formula = of 2.5 times billig or 8-10 times BCF are long gone. =20 Example: inferior, basin-floor limited Class B KFSG (now KXOL-FM) in = LA with no billing and a must-change format: $250 million. I'm archiving this message and will trot it out whenever you good = radio folks argue from the Bakersfield Theory...the theory that radio is = spread too thin because the government allows too much competition for a = limited audience. Here is a station that has neither a service to offer = nor a profit until it meets the monthly nut on $250 million. The = station is correctly priced on its perceived potential, irrespective of = its actual billing...and yet Bakersfielders would have us believe that = listener service would be enhanced if only the FCC would engineer = greater scarcity for the benefit of the owners. Jerome |
David Eduardo wrote:
Example: inferior, basin-floor limited Class B KFSG (now KXOL-FM) in LA with no billing and a must-change format: $250 million. Any chance they'd be willing to "sell" their callsign? |
"CA was in NJ" SHOT_ON_SIGHT wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: Example: inferior, basin-floor limited Class B KFSG (now KXOL-FM) in LA with no billing and a must-change format: $250 million. Any chance they'd be willing to "sell" their callsign? Doubt it. They paid money to get consent form the Utah X-band station to get it. It stands for "El Sol 96.3" which is the station name; in Mexico, "X" is pronounced almost like an "S." |
On 24 Jul 2003 16:19:32 GMT, "Cooperstown.Net"
wrote: I'm archiving this message and will trot it out whenever you good = radio folks argue from the Bakersfield Theory...the theory that radio is = spread too thin because the government allows too much competition for a = limited audience. Here is a station that has neither a service to offer = nor a profit until it meets the monthly nut on $250 million. station is correctly priced on its perceived potential, irrespective of = its actual billing...and yet Bakersfielders would have us believe that = listener service would be enhanced if only the FCC would engineer = greater scarcity for the benefit of the owners. Jerome As the author of what you term the Bakersfield argument, I contend your argument fails because you (a) assume the station is priced correctly and the buyer did not over-pay -- which is a common phenomenon in broadcasting -- and (b) fail to take market size into account. Los Angeles is so big that a station with a tiny percentage of the audience is still reaching so many people that it can be profitable. In smaller markets that just isn't so. Divide up the pie in Bakersfield thinly enough, and nobody makes any money. Without consolidation, only the top-ranked handful of Bakersfield's 30+ signals could be operated profitably today. Only three or four of Bakersfield stations can be considered full-service operations under the loosest definition of that term, and they're all in clusters of three or more signals. A stand-alone, fully-staffed all-news station with a 2 share in L.A. can be hugely profitable. A station with a 2 share in Bakersfield pretty much needs to be automated, and the rent had better be cheap. The Los Angeles metro is listed by Arbitron with a population of 10.407.400, approximately 21 times the size of the Bakersfield metro. So a station that is really nothing but a "stick" selling for $250,000,000 in Los Angeles, is roughly analogous to such a Bakersfield station selling at between $11 and 12 million, which would be high (my employer sold a full power TV station a few years back for about that much), but I suppose it's possible. Of course, having paid out that money, you'd have no guarantee of ever making it back. And if you did, it would mean you really did invent a better moustrap and put somebody else out of contention. Mark Howell |
If anyone can post an audio sample (with a link here) of an IBOC-AM using an
average AM radio please do so. Band-scans up and down across 930 WPAT's IBOC signal (notice how it nearly obliterates 920 WPHY and hisses in the background of 910 WRKL and 950 WPEN): ftp://ftp.amstereoradio.com/uploads/wpatiboc.mp3 ftp://ftp.amstereoradio.com/uploads/wpatscn2.mp3 Switching back and forth between 1530 WSAI and 1520 WWKB, when WSAI was testing IBOC at night and WWKB happened to be broadcasting "dead air", making the "hash" from WSAI even more noticeable (skywave reception from New Jersey): ftp://ftp.amstereoradio.com/iboc/wsaiiboc.mp3 |
i cannot believe that it is allowed (fcc rules?) to disturb the regular
reception of other AM stations in the locality! why do they let this happen? As the FCC will tell you if you make this sort of complaint, the FCC does not and cannot guarantee reception of any station, regardless of power output, distance to the receiver or interference. |
I really has more to do with TV. Actually, Soccer is very homoerotic.
They wear skimpy shorts and often get them pulled down during play. Soccer players seem more physically comfortable with each other than American players. They don't seem to care what anybody thinks. Rubgy, too... I'd love to hear the radio play-by-play of what the article below describes. It's a strange world, isn't it? American athletes go around raping and killing people, while Aussies engage in foreplay with their teammates right on the field. And was nobody suspicious when they saw this guy carrying around a tube of KY? :-) Rugger Resigns Over Rectal Fouls Matt Alsdorf, Gay.com / PlanetOut.com Network Wednesday, April 4, 2001 / 05:51 PM Digital penetration of opposing players while on the field was deemed "unsportsmanlike interference" by Australian rugby's governing body, and the offending player has been forced to resign. An Australian pro rugby player who resigned this weekend after being caught sticking his finger in opposing players' anuses during a match is now considering taking legal action against the New Zealand Cancer Society (NZCS) for using his picture in an advertisement for prostate cancer checks. John Hopoate, a winger for the Australian National Rugby League's West Tigers club, received a 12-week suspension from the NRL judiciary last week for "unsportsmanlike interference" with three North Queensland players whom he digitally penetrated. The Associated Press reported that the resignation came after team management met to consider calls for his removal. Hopoate said he believed his decision was in the best interest of the club and its fans, according to Agence France Presse. "I sincerely regret that anything I may have done has caused stress, anxiety and disappointment to everyone involved with the West Tigers," AFP quoted Hopoate as saying in a statement he released through his manager. NZCS took out an advertisement in New Zealand's The Dominion newspaper with a color close-up of Hopoate apparently sticking his finger in North Queensland captain Paul Bowman's anus. According to the Australian Associated Press (AAP), the accompanying text reads, "A bloke's chances of developing prostate cancer increases as he gets older. If you have symptoms that you're concerned about, consult your local doctor. It won't hurt a bit -- promise." The AAP reports that Hopoate and his manager say they were not consulted by NZCS about use of the image and are "looking at the legal ramifications." NRL chief executive David Moffett said the ad was "appalling." But NZCS's Roger Taylor was quoted by New Zealand's One News as saying, "It's a difficult message to get across for a difficult disease ... and we felt our normal health promotion doesn't work that well and that this was a topical issue that would perhaps get it out there." According to AFP, Hopoate, a 27-year-old teetotalling Mormon father of five, had faced the NRL's disciplinary commission seven times in the past four years, primarily for fighting. p.s. Relevancy to this thread: Due to its 8.5-second digital encoding/transmission/decoding delay, IBOC is incapable of broadcasting live sporting events in real-time. And since the analog audio is also delayed to match, spectators who bring a transistor radio to the game will hear the play-by-play of what happened 8.5 seconds ago! |
|
|
|
|
I wonder if that's why our teams wear such protective uniforms. All
this time we thought it was to avoid breaking bones. Yeah, that's about as believable as the reasons cyclists say they wear skin-tight spandex outfits which are designed to be worn "commando". Or, as believeable as Mike Savage's excuse "I didn't know I was on the air". |
"WBRW" wrote in message ... If anyone can post an audio sample (with a link here) of an IBOC-AM using an average AM radio please do so. Band-scans up and down across 930 WPAT's IBOC signal (notice how it nearly obliterates 920 WPHY and hisses in the background of 910 WRKL and 950 WPEN): ftp://ftp.amstereoradio.com/uploads/wpatiboc.mp3 ftp://ftp.amstereoradio.com/uploads/wpatscn2.mp3 Thanks for the links, dude ;-), they were most helpful. First-adjacents get the major step-on while seconds get their share of hash. To be fair, much of the hiss (in regard to listening to 930) was on stereo reception. In mono the hiss was less, but still annoying. It's a noisy signal that a strong signal doesn't fix. And don't get me started on the telephone tin-can quality of what's left of the analog signal. 920 & 940 were both obliterated, an inexcusable situation. The fact these stations were receivable without analog interference from 930 suggests these are receivable AM stations being jammed (ok, not intentionally, we'll say involuntary stomping on). Wasn't the FRC (Federal Radio Commission, predecessor to the FCC) formed to stop this kind of interference? As stated before, this isn't IBOC but IBAC twice (an in-band adjacent channel on both sides) with a hit to the main channel to boot (hiss & reduced fidelity). IMHO the only answer is for the FCC to allocate spectrum in the short-wave band for DRM to replicate current AM service in digital. The FCC allocated new bandwidth for FM, let them do the same for DRM. |
"Mark Howell" wrote in message
As the author of what you term the Bakersfield argument, I contend your argument fails because you (a) assume the station is priced correctly and the buyer did not over-pay -- which is a common phenomenon in broadcasting -- and (b) fail to take market size into account. Los Angeles is so big that a station with a tiny percentage of the audience is still reaching so many people that it can be profitable. On a) I suppose my phrasing was a bit ambiguous. I didn't mean to imply that this particular station was correctly priced, only that markets are wise to price a scarce asset like a radio station according to its reach, not according to its billing in some passing, suboptimal implementation. Whether in large communities or small, a free market in scarce licenses virtually guarantees that stations end up in the hands of the brave or foolhardy or optimistic entities that are willing to pay the most. At least where there's no sentimental legacy attachment, as there clearly is in Bakersfield. Can the govt. really know how many stations a market is able to support, if entrepreneurs are willing to bet their own funds that that market can support one more? Isn't the advertising market dynamic with the evolution of traditional employees into contractors who must flog their services continually? Most importantly, doesn't the rate of return generated by that advertising market depend fundamentally on what the high bidders freely dared to pay for their licenses? And wouldn't a Bakersfield-inspired, govt.-imposed scarcity work its way right back into the license price...to where the buyer's ROI from operations got knocked down all over again? Jerome |
On 28 Jul 2003 19:54:08 GMT, "Cooperstown.Net"
wrote: Can the govt. really know how many stations a market is able to support, if entrepreneurs are willing to bet their own funds that that market can support one more? Isn't the advertising market dynamic with the evolution of traditional employees into contractors who must flog their services continually? Most importantly, doesn't the rate of return generated by that advertising market depend fundamentally on what the high bidders freely dared to pay for their licenses? And wouldn't a Bakersfield-inspired, govt.-imposed scarcity work its way right back into the license price...to where the buyer's ROI from operations got knocked down all over again? What we have now is government-imposed oversupply. When we had free competition, we had two-thirds of stations losing money, so the government stepped in to keep them on the air by allowing consolidation of ownership. Without that intervention, the less capable operators would have gone bust and we would have far fewer stations on the air than we do today, (just as when we have too many grocery stores, those that can't maintain market share go out of business). Had that happened, we might not be having all these debates about how local service has gone to hell in a handbasket. Instead, the government created a mechanism that allowed the bad operators and marginal signals to cash out at inflated prices to roll-ups -- and some of these stations were even put on the air with the specific purpose of so doing. Mark Howell |
Exactly what is the point of broadcasting these zero-ratings,
zero-advertiser, zero-listener formats in IBOC digital?? You miss the point. The point is that, once the stations goes digital, they can convert to music formats and be competative with FM in terms of sound quality -- and (with good programming and promotion) ultimately market share. There might be an improvement in quality but it could never match FM due to the data compression artifacts. Since it will take several years for there to be a substantial installed base of IBOC radio receivers, which stations would you propose converting first? The ones that already have a large listenership, or the secondary players? Remember, digital is an equalizer -- you don't need to have the most powerful transmitter in the market in order to act like you do. Coverage area would be substantially reduced due to all the adjacent channel interferance. And besides, it would be unusable at night. What's pointless is converting the major stations that current have talk formats, with Dr. Laura, Rush, etc. The digital artifacts are most noticable with talk, anyway. What digital broadcasting does is provide a scenario whereby the smaller AM stations that have fallen into disuse can find new life (and from their owners' perspective, gain value). - Jonathan I wouldn't start counting the added revenue yet. Bob Radil A ?subject=NewsgroupRes ponse" E-Mail /A |
WBRW wrote:
Country, does not exist on the air within 50 miles of NYC. Yes, yes, yes, people say that there simply aren't that many country music fans within the City itself, and they're correct -- but any decent NYC-area signal will cover plenty of the surrounding suburban areas were there are many country fans. "Y-107" proved this, with its lousy-ass signal getting better ratings -- even within the NYC market itself I think you're ignoring the other part of the curve for a broadcaster and that's the issue of what a broadcaster can earn with a particular format. The likely reason that country doesn't work in NYC is that advertisers in NYC don't want to target country music listeners, or alternatively even though large in number, they're too spread out to support many small advertisers away from where they regularly travel. |
On 8 Aug 2003 22:40:23 GMT, Art Clemons
wrote: I think you're ignoring the other part of the curve for a broadcaster and that's the issue of what a broadcaster can earn with a particular format. The likely reason that country doesn't work in NYC is that advertisers in NYC don't want to target country music listeners, or alternatively even though large in number, they're too spread out to support many small advertisers away from where they regularly travel. One, I think it's snobbery. Two, much of today's Country doesn't sound much different than AC. Three, media buyers are younger than most Boybands and the owners are chicken. They'd all rather the the 11th techno-alternative-trance-AC-Urban-Polka station in the market before taking the Country plunge. I would bet that if Roseland ( a local concert venue in Manhattan) had a country night every week we'd have to rope off the streets to control the crowds. Even better, the guns wouldn't be automatic weapons, they'd be six shooters like the good ol days. Rich |
On 10 Aug 2003 16:09:38 GMT, Rich Wood
wrote: One, I think it's snobbery. Two, much of today's Country doesn't sound much different than AC. Three, media buyers are younger than most Boybands and the owners are chicken. Can't comment on point three, but your first two are bulls-eyes! Point two in particular is right on target. when talking about today's "mainstream" country. The currents, recurrents and even most of the oldies sound closer to the hits of the Top 40 Era than the music being played on CHR and some AC stations. In fact, some of the song and artists played as oldies on mainstream country stations *are* straight out of the Top 40 Era -- Johnny Cash, Statler Brothers, Oak Ridge Boys, Dolly Parton, quite a long list of country acts that are fondly remembered by Baby Boomers who grew up on Top 40. And let's not forget the number of country performers, especially female artists, who are actually getting a lot of play on AC radio and VH-1. Sometimes I turn on VH-1 while I'm at the computer just because I enjoy looking at Faith Hill, Shania Twain, Martina McBride, etc. Country has always been an important part of what started as Top 40 and has evolved into Adult Contemporary. I grew up listening to rockabilly, along with the blues, R&B, and Brill Building pop that also contributed to the big hits of the '50s, '60s and early '70s. At the time I didn't care for much "hardcore" country -- George Jones, Tammy Wynette, Loretta Lynn, Conway Twitty (himself a Top 40 one-hit wonder with "Make Believe"), Porter Wagoner and the like -- probably because it was the "old folks" music my parents and grandparents listened to. But when Ray Charles did an entire album of country songs, I listened and liked what I heard. When Roger Miller and Ray Stevens turned out very clever novelty songs, I didn't care how they were categorized. When Patsy Cline sang "Crazy", it didn't matter one bit that both the song and the singer were considered country. And to be honest, I didn't consider Johnny Cash's "Ring Of Fire" country at all, since I JUST KNEW that country music never used mariachi trumpets! All these artists were able to co-exist on the Hot 100 with Chuck Berry, Brook Benton, the Beach Boys, the Four Seasons, and all of the Memphis, Motown and British Invasion acts. If the music was good and spoke to the teenaged heart-and-soul, that's all that mattered to us back then. Today's music industry, including music radio formats, is actually hurting itself with its emphasis on format fragmentation. An artist, label or station that tries to reach only a specific audience is in trouble when the day comes that the audience stops listening and buying. OTOH, an artist, label or station with broad appeal can continue to sell to a maturing/aging audience even as a new generation discovers it -- even if that sort of appeal skips a generation now and then before being rediscovered, as happened with Dolly Parton and more recently with Tony Bennett. They'd all rather the the 11th techno-alternative-trance-AC-Urban-Polka station in the market before taking the Country plunge. And when the Flavor Of The Month changes, they'll change format in search of another short-term success. Their problem, not the listeners'. Now that I'm a fulltime listener, the music-station presets on my radios are filled with various flavors of oldies stations. If I'm listening to a Classic Rock station and a song comes on that I don't especially care for, I punch over to a Classic Hits station ... or an AC with an extensive oldies library. If all else fails, I grab a CD from the Time-Life or Rhino catalogs. Rap, trance, boy-bands and the other genres that appeal to today's youth may or may not be popular a few years from now; the music I listen to has been around for fifty years, more or less, and it still appeals to the largest and most affluent generation in history. Maybe today's youth-oriented stations are actually the modern equivalent of the pioneering Top 40 stations, and they'll be successful for decades to come. But that's not the way I'd bet. I just don't see a modern-day Alan Freed, Bruce Morrow or Art Roberts among the current crop of jocks. Nor do I see very many record industry execs these days who working to find and develop artists with even moderately broad-based appeal. Tommy Mottola has had considerable success, but he's still a long way from becoming the next Clive Davis; as far as I can tell no one is even trying to become the next Berry Gordy, Sam Phillips or Phil Spector. I would bet that if Roseland ( a local concert venue in Manhattan) had a country night every week we'd have to rope off the streets to control the crowds. Even better, the guns wouldn't be automatic weapons, they'd be six shooters like the good ol days. I dunno. These days even rural deputy sheriffs and Texas Rangers (the closest modern kin of the Old West lawmen) carry semi-autos. People just don't respect tradition anymore.g ___ Walter Luffman Medina, TN USA Amateur curmudgeon, equal-opportunity annoyer |
|
"Walter Luffman" wrote in message ... On 14 Aug 2003 17:07:14 GMT, (Sven Franklyn Weil) wrote: In article , Walter Luffman wrote: few years from now; the music I listen to has been around for fifty years, more or less, and it still appeals to the largest and most affluent generation in history. And it's a generation that is aging out of the range advertisers want. It's also a generation whose upper tiers are dying off. Most Top 40 Oldies fans (including rockabilly, blues and other genres popular in the early portion of that era) are Baby Boomers, the leader edge of which group is only now in its late fifties. Even extending the beginning of the "Top 40 generation" upward a few years, they're in their early 60s at most, which means relatively few already dying of age-related causes. And we Baby Boomers generally have more disposable income today than we ever had in our past. The kids are out on their own. We're either at or just past our peak earning years. Our homes are already paid off. We can treat ourselves to luxuries we could never afford when we were younger. Believe me, I buy a lot more than Metamucil and blood-pressure pills! Stop there. Adevertisers determine where ad money will be spent. When station reps or sellers call, if they do not offer the target deemo, they are wasting their time. Very, very few advertisers use radio to reach 55+ consumers, whatever their income level. The main reason is a belief, backed by tons of research, that older consumers are more set in buying patterns and thus require much more advertising (repetiton) to be convinced to change. In most cases, the increase in frequency is not worth the eventual sale. So 90+ percent of ad campaigns are not targeted at 55+. Since these decisions are made by marketers at P&G and Ford and Budweiser, there is no way individeual stasitons or groups can possibly get through at that level... in fact, demographics were probably considered in procut design. Those who do target 55+ ususally use specialized magazines (AARP, for example) and special interest publications (like travel magazines, finance magazines, etc.) since they are efficient in reaching 55+ persons. Who cares? Most of my contemporaries would rather pay off their credit card debt, or just pay cash and stay out of debt in the first place. You might have a point when it comes to "the trendiest clothes", though -- I wear a business suit when I must, jeans or khakis when I can, but I stopped worrying about being trendy a long time ago. You are an exceptional person in this group. A significant portion of Americans reaching retirement age have savings under $100,000 (think it is 90% plus) and will live on $1200 in monthly SS payments. Most retired persons have extensive credit card debt, since they use the card to finance emergencies, and then gto for years paying it down. You have something against Wal-Mart, Sears and Best Buy? Yeah, I shop at those places. I also spend lot of money at Home Depot, PetsMart, Office Max, Kroger, various upscale department stores, Starbucks, and even Burger King (although I prefer Sonic Drive-Ins ... I tip the carhops, something I doubt many teenagers ever do). All those places are part of "middle America". I have no idea where people in parts of America outside the "middle" shop. And I don't especially care where people outside the United States shop, although I would presume they shop primarily in their home countries because of convenience. Where you shop or how much you spend is not the issue. It is how much in dollars per person an advertiser would spend to get you to quit buying Metamucil at Wal-Mart and start getting it at Target. The conclusion by most is that changing life-long brand preference is more expensive to change than the profit on several years consumption of Metamucil, even if you use really heaping tablespoons full. |
see below
David Eduardo wrote: "Walter Luffman" wrote in message ... On 14 Aug 2003 17:07:14 GMT, (Sven Franklyn Weil) wrote: In article , Walter Luffman wrote: few years from now; the music I listen to has been around for fifty years, more or less, and it still appeals to the largest and most affluent generation in history. And it's a generation that is aging out of the range advertisers want. It's also a generation whose upper tiers are dying off. Most Top 40 Oldies fans (including rockabilly, blues and other genres popular in the early portion of that era) are Baby Boomers, the leader edge of which group is only now in its late fifties. Even extending the beginning of the "Top 40 generation" upward a few years, they're in their early 60s at most, which means relatively few already dying of age-related causes. And we Baby Boomers generally have more disposable income today than we ever had in our past. The kids are out on their own. We're either at or just past our peak earning years. Our homes are already paid off. We can treat ourselves to luxuries we could never afford when we were younger. Believe me, I buy a lot more than Metamucil and blood-pressure pills! Stop there. Adevertisers determine where ad money will be spent. When station reps or sellers call, if they do not offer the target deemo, they are wasting their time. thus the problem being identified. Just because the sales folks or ad folks ignore this demo today only seems that they will be replaced in not too distant future. Guess my point is follow the money. Very, very few advertisers use radio to reach 55+ consumers, whatever their income level. The main reason is a belief, backed by tons of research, that older consumers are more set in buying patterns and thus require much more advertising (repetiton) to be convinced to change. can not argue with this on general principal - again - follow the money - the % of disposable $ very soon is not going to be teens but all of us old farts as the snake continues to swallow the elephant - just my opinion and your test obviously show I am dead wrong - but lets talk again in another 10 years and see what the deal is then :-) In most cases, the increase in frequency is not worth the eventual sale. So 90+ percent of ad campaigns are not targeted at 55+. Since these decisions are made by marketers at P&G and Ford and Budweiser, there is no way individeual stasitons or groups can possibly get through at that level... in fact, demographics were probably considered in procut design. Those who do target 55+ ususally use specialized magazines (AARP, for example) and special interest publications (like travel magazines, finance magazines, etc.) since they are efficient in reaching 55+ persons. So decide which side you are arguing - think these publications are doing OK and are increasing distribution and revenue (though I may just be old) Who cares? Most of my contemporaries would rather pay off their credit card debt, or just pay cash and stay out of debt in the first place. You might have a point when it comes to "the trendiest clothes", though -- I wear a business suit when I must, jeans or khakis when I can, but I stopped worrying about being trendy a long time ago. You are an exceptional person in this group. A significant portion of Americans reaching retirement age have savings under $100,000 (think it is 90% plus) and will live on $1200 in monthly SS payments. Most retired persons have extensive credit card debt, since they use the card to finance emergencies, and then gto for years paying it down. OK - even if all us old farts are broke and deep in debt, the card companies and banks keep letting us buy, though I doubt these statistics as they apply to the present 50 to 60 age group, maybe for present 70+ folks your numbers work - what you got for the current 50 to 60 group? You have something against Wal-Mart, Sears and Best Buy? Yeah, I shop at those places. I also spend lot of money at Home Depot, PetsMart, Office Max, Kroger, various upscale department stores, Starbucks, and even Burger King (although I prefer Sonic Drive-Ins ... I tip the carhops, something I doubt many teenagers ever do). All those places are part of "middle America". I have no idea where people in parts of America outside the "middle" shop. And I don't especially care where people outside the United States shop, although I would presume they shop primarily in their home countries because of convenience. Where you shop or how much you spend is not the issue. It is how much in dollars per person an advertiser would spend to get you to quit buying Metamucil at Wal-Mart and start getting it at Target. The conclusion by most is that changing life-long brand preference is more expensive to change than the profit on several years consumption of Metamucil, even if you use really heaping tablespoons full. Again - this may be true today, but the elephant is getting to be toward the back of that snake and that elephant has lots of disposable $ compared to a current 15 year old population. I would think that at some point ad and marketing folks would at least look at this reality. Or maybe I am just old an senile and unrealistic |
On 18 Aug 2003 14:22:40 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote: Stop there. Adevertisers determine where ad money will be spent. When station reps or sellers call, if they do not offer the target deemo, they are wasting their time. Very, very few advertisers use radio to reach 55+ consumers, whatever their income level. The main reason is a belief, backed by tons of research, that older consumers are more set in buying patterns and thus require much more advertising (repetiton) to be convinced to change. In most cases, the increase in frequency is not worth the eventual sale. So 90+ percent of ad campaigns are not targeted at 55+. Maybe you're right, maybe not. I wouldn't know, since I'm only 54. But I watch the all-news cable channels instead of MTV, and most of the commercials I see are for things that are marketed to my generation. Same goes for the radio stations I listen to and the magazines I read -- I choose the ones that meet my tastes, and they are the ones advertisers use to reach me. I may be an Old Fart (and proud of it!), but that doesn't mean I don't still choose between McDonald's and Wendy's, or between Ford and GM, or between Coke and Pepsi. AAMOF, I recently switched from Coke Classic to Pepsi One. Needed a sugar-free alternative to the Coke I've preferred all my life, and never cared that much for Diet Coke's aftertaste. So I ignored brand loyalty and went with the product I liked better. I suppose that means I can still be swayed by advertising if I find the product itself suitable. Since these decisions are made by marketers at P&G and Ford and Budweiser, there is no way individeual stasitons or groups can possibly get through at that level... in fact, demographics were probably considered in procut design. I never said otherwise. But the radio stations I listen to generally carry advertising that's aimed at adults, often at middle-aged and older adults rather than young ones. Advertise anything you want on a CHR station, I'll never hear it. Advertise Clearasil or The Gap on an oldies or news-talk station, you're wasting money. Those who do target 55+ ususally use specialized magazines (AARP, for example) and special interest publications (like travel magazines, finance magazines, etc.) since they are efficient in reaching 55+ persons. Tell me, what ISN'T a special-interest magazine? I suppose Parade and USA Weekend qualify, but I don't know anyone who specifically subscribe to them ... they're just part of the Sunday newspaper, which the grownups subscribe to and the whole family reads. (The newspaper industry admits that newsstands account for only a small portion of total sales.) Life and Look magazines are long gone. Reader's Digest doesn't appeal to kids nearly as much as it does to Old Farts. TV Guide might qualify as a mass-appeal magazine, I suppose. People magazine may have started as a mass-appeal magazine, but these day's it's just a classier version of the gossip magazines and it appeals to much the same audience. I subscribe to a couple dozen different magazines, and I suppose every one of them qualifies as special-interest. That includes AARP Magazine, of course. But it also includes three motorcycle magazines I get, six computer magazines, two veterans' organization magazines and two financial magazines. Sorry, I quit reading Rolling Stone years ago and I never cared for Spin. (But I do pick up several guitar- and bass-oriented magazines on newsstands, since I'm thinking about buying a new instrument or two.) You are an exceptional person in this group. A significant portion of Americans reaching retirement age have savings under $100,000 (think it is 90% plus) and will live on $1200 in monthly SS payments. Incorrect. reread your own statement. Hardly anyone reaching retirement age is receiving Social Security payments; it's those who have actually reached the minimum age and who have also chosen to retire (or those who are old enough to continue working while simultaneously receiving SS) who receive Social Security benefits. (And a few people like me receive Social Security Disability Income benefits, but that's not the same as the retirement benefit.) Most retired persons have extensive credit card debt, since they use the card to finance emergencies, and then gto for years paying it down. Not the retirees I know. They pay off their cards every month, and have ever since they figured out how much of their debt was due to interest and other charges. Where you shop or how much you spend is not the issue. It is how much in dollars per person an advertiser would spend to get you to quit buying Metamucil at Wal-Mart and start getting it at Target. The conclusion by most is that changing life-long brand preference is more expensive to change than the profit on several years consumption of Metamucil, even if you use really heaping tablespoons full. And Metamucil itself is only a tiny part of the issue, since as I have pointed out I buy a lot of the same things that younger adults do. (Actually, in my case it's Fibercon these days; I switched from Metamucil a few years ago. I also switched from Kmart to Wal-Mart for most of my "mart" shopping, and most recently began shopping at Target also. Why Target? Because it's near several other stores where I shop -- Radio Shack, Office Max, CD Warehouse, Goody's (the clothing chain, not Sam Goody), Kroger supermarkets, and several restaurants of both the fast-foot and "regular" variety. (But now there's a new Starbucks across the street from the Wal-Mart Supercenter, so I still go in that direction quite a bit.) Perhaps when you're older you'll understand that a lot of advertisers do recognize the economic clout of the Baby Boom generation and target us through our "specialized" media. ___ Walter Luffman Medina, TN USA Amateur curmudgeon, equal-opportunity annoyer |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:21 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com