|
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
On Sep 4, 9:01 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in ... David Eduardo wrote: "D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... I had an XM Eno (it went the way of the dumpster) and in the Hassayampa area of Prescott, there is no signal anywhere. I am pretty convinced at this point that the portables need to be near terrestrial repeaters and can't really see the satellites. Well, that simply isn't true. Now, they do often need an external antenna...the built-in can be pretty limited. But if you go into the menu you can find the antenna aiming page...it will tell you if you're listening to a repeater or a satellite. I get direct satellite reception all over the backwater and backwoods locations I travel. And my colleagues do the same. The Eno is market to be worn on a wristband, and is positioned as not needing an antena. I tried an antena that had a wire up the sleve and clipped to my helmet, and it helped only slightly... the listening was frequenly plagued by dropouts. I even get reception, indoors, on a MyFi in White Lake, Wisconsin. Where the nearest repeater is more than 5 hours away. In LA, away from mountains, it worked. Of course, this is where there are several dozen terrestrial repeaters. Sounds like either you got a bad receiver, or you got a bad external antenna. That does happen. I had a bad portable antenna out of the box. Once replaced...never a problem. I can mow the lawn listening to Fine Tuning, without so much as a glitch in the North Woods of Wisconsin. Considering the radio is sold as a wrist or belt strap one, for jogging, biking or such, not much of an exterior antenna is possible... the radio is the size of an iPod. I'd verify performance with another radio. Sounds like you have a dud. XM pretty much confirmed when I cancelled. They even offered to give me a different radio.and said that "some areas are not suitable for an "ultra" portable device... they also offered a free year subscription. I got the idea this was not a new issue with them. - Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Ibiquity = Ubiquitous Iniquity |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
On Sep 4, 12:18 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in message ... I didn't ask you about your fake imagined history that you shoe horn in at every opportunity. Call Bob DuTriel, the associate of Ron Rackley (the formost authority on directional AM antennas in the US) in Florida and ask about me. I assisted Bob while he rebuilt the WQII directional when I decided to reengineer the station. The minimum contour for FM stations to get significant listening is the 64 dbu, roughly 1.5 mv/m. For AM in metros, it is about 10 mv/m. Both AM and FM are measurements of the strength of the EMF from a transmitter at some point of distance from it dBu used to be called dBv but got confused with dBV, and was changed. It's a decibel measurement of voltage.... as my equivalency shows. dBuV is not the same thing as dBV. Care to try again. I said that, historically, the tem was changed from dBv to dBu because folks were confusing dBv and dBV... that was the origin of the "u" in dBu... which bagan with a lower case "v." While you are at it explain how 1.5 mV/m equates to either 64dBuV or 64dBV. Equivalent field strength expressed in with a different scale. Even my speedometer has two different scales, and they have equivalents all the way along, just as a metric tape and a yardstick do. My radio needs 10V/m to receive a station decently? My God no wonder you didn't believe my posts on the signal strength of local stations. I'm glad we finally figured that out. I don't care what your $5 thousand dollar radio needs. The fact is that after examining thousands and thousands of diary mentions for at home and at work by ZIP code, it has been found in several different studies that 80% of all FM listening takes place in the 70 dBu contour and 15% to 17% more takes place between the 70 and the 64 dBu contours. There is nearly no listening outside the 64 dBu contour. So, most of us actually running radio stations or involved in programming know that there is pretty much no potential for listener growth outside the 64 dBu contour as it is apparent from empirical evidence across a variety of markets and ratings periods that listeners do not listen to relatively weak signals. The same studies, on AM, showed that in and in the environs of the Top 100 metros, there is pretty much no listening outside the 10 mv/m contour. This corresponds with more anecdotal evidence that shows that below 10 mv/m the signals are so subject to man-made interference from everything from computers to traffic light controllers that they are annoying to listen to. In some metros the minimum level seems to match neatly the 15 mv/m contour or points in between, probably indicating greater noise levels in the market in general. Again, it is not about whether a station can be received. It is about whether listeners, in any significant quantity, are able to enjoyably listen to a station. And it has been proven that a pretty intense signal is necessary for a station to get audience in the rated metro areas (where about 75% of the US population lives) "HD Radio Effort Undermined by Weak Tuners in Expensive Radios" "Each of the HD radios had their external antennas leads connected and extended out, while my own radios worked off of their internal leads. I started with the FM band, so the Zenith was not part of this test. WCBS-FM came in clear as a bell on my car radio. Second best was the Sony shower radio, which picked the station up well. The results were less than stellar for the three HD radios. Not only were the results worse than the Sony, none of them could tap into an HD signal at ground level." http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/7002/hd-radio2.html See folks, Eduardo doesn't let himself get upset with attempts at insults - I could even say that his ******* Mother is a whore, that the best part of him ran down his whoring Mother's legs, that his Father sexually abused him while his Mother watched, that Eduardo used to **** his slutty sister while his ******* parents gave instructions, that IBOC is a crock, that spicks are nothing but lazy-ass mother ****ers waiting for handouts, that the US Government is shortly going to open its boarders to all those greazy, smelly Mexican truck drivers, that his wife left him for another woman, that his wife left him for his trolling 24/7, and that his wife stopped ****ing him years ago ! See, Eduardo doesn't ca http://is3.okcupid.com/users/162/390...1107623537.jpg |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
What's that radio phonograph newsgroup called? Maybe I ought to get over
there and tell them little sissy girls what a BUNCH of little girls they Really ARE!!!!! cuhulin |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
Tighten up.Ventura isn't the real name of that California town anyway.
Tell her I Love her. cuhulin |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
David Eduardo wrote:
SNIP 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. Is that really true? My 15 year old has the choice of radio (AM & FM), Cds, Internet streams and his MP3 player. He hardly ever listens (or has on) the radio, he streams when he is at the computer, plays CDs when he is relaxing and uses his mp3 player when he is on the move. I checked and he reports that his mates have similar listening habits. I thinks it's more likely that, whatever format, the next generation of kids won't bother with radios - it'll just be something that comes with a car if they have one. As someone said earlier, the mainstream broadcasters are fighting a battle in a war that is over. Like the record companies they have not got their heads around the listening choices that we have today. As to the form of modulation that you are obsessed by it is the most technically ridiculous concept ever dreamed up. No decent RF engineer would have come up with this load of crock unless there was a bunch of suits looking over his shoulders. Anyways, we in the UK have not been so silly as to put our digital radio on the Medium Wave. Charlie. -- M0WYM www.radiowymsey.org |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
On Sep 4, 9:10 am, Steve wrote:
On Sep 4, 9:01 am, "David Eduardo" wrote: "D Peter Maus" wrote in ... David Eduardo wrote: "D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... I had an XM Eno (it went the way of the dumpster) and in the Hassayampa area of Prescott, there is no signal anywhere. I am pretty convinced at this point that the portables need to be near terrestrial repeaters and can't really see the satellites. Well, that simply isn't true. Now, they do often need an external antenna...the built-in can be pretty limited. But if you go into the menu you can find the antenna aiming page...it will tell you if you're listening to a repeater or a satellite. I get direct satellite reception all over the backwater and backwoods locations I travel. And my colleagues do the same. The Eno is market to be worn on a wristband, and is positioned as not needing an antena. I tried an antena that had a wire up the sleve and clipped to my helmet, and it helped only slightly... the listening was frequenly plagued by dropouts. I even get reception, indoors, on a MyFi in White Lake, Wisconsin. Where the nearest repeater is more than 5 hours away. In LA, away from mountains, it worked. Of course, this is where there are several dozen terrestrial repeaters. Sounds like either you got a bad receiver, or you got a bad external antenna. That does happen. I had a bad portable antenna out of the box. Once replaced...never a problem. I can mow the lawn listening to Fine Tuning, without so much as a glitch in the North Woods of Wisconsin. Considering the radio is sold as a wrist or belt strap one, for jogging, biking or such, not much of an exterior antenna is possible... the radio is the size of an iPod. I'd verify performance with another radio. Sounds like you have a dud. XM pretty much confirmed when I cancelled. They even offered to give me a different radio.and said that "some areas are not suitable for an "ultra" portable device... they also offered a free year subscription. I got the idea this was not a new issue with them. - Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - - Ibiquity = Ubiquitous Iniquity- The iBiquity of it all . . . 262 Messages to Date and one might ask : What Gag Order ? all i see is the blinking blue light ~ RHF { life beyind the 10mv/m contour } |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
On Sep 3, 9:31 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in message ... That would only be a couple of blocks around the 50K station antenna with Eduardo's 10V/meter contour. Whatever that means. - You don't know what a 10 mv/m contour is? DE - According to you : The People that Count live with-in the 10mv/m Contour. The People that Do Not Count live out-side the 10mv/m Contour. - - - DXers being the a significant percentage of the People that Do Not Count. ~ RHF |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... I had an XM Eno (it went the way of the dumpster) and in the Hassayampa area of Prescott, there is no signal anywhere. I am pretty convinced at this point that the portables need to be near terrestrial repeaters and can't really see the satellites. Well, that simply isn't true. Now, they do often need an external antenna...the built-in can be pretty limited. But if you go into the menu you can find the antenna aiming page...it will tell you if you're listening to a repeater or a satellite. I get direct satellite reception all over the backwater and backwoods locations I travel. And my colleagues do the same. The Eno is market to be worn on a wristband, and is positioned as not needing an antena. I tried an antena that had a wire up the sleve and clipped to my helmet, and it helped only slightly... the listening was frequenly plagued by dropouts. I even get reception, indoors, on a MyFi in White Lake, Wisconsin. Where the nearest repeater is more than 5 hours away. In LA, away from mountains, it worked. Of course, this is where there are several dozen terrestrial repeaters. Sounds like either you got a bad receiver, or you got a bad external antenna. That does happen. I had a bad portable antenna out of the box. Once replaced...never a problem. I can mow the lawn listening to Fine Tuning, without so much as a glitch in the North Woods of Wisconsin. Considering the radio is sold as a wrist or belt strap one, for jogging, biking or such, not much of an exterior antenna is possible... the radio is the size of an iPod. I'd verify performance with another radio. Sounds like you have a dud. XM pretty much confirmed when I cancelled. They even offered to give me a different radio.and said that "some areas are not suitable for an "ultra" portable device... they also offered a free year subscription. I got the idea this was not a new issue with them. So, you didn't take them up on their offer with a different radio? |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
Many years ago, Jackson,Mississippi was called Le Fluers Bluff.Don't
blame that frog name on me. cuhulin |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
"IBOCcrock" wrote in message oups.com... See, Eduardo doesn't ca No, "Eduardo" just ran out of troll food. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
"charlie" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: SNIP 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. Is that really true? Yep, comes right out of Arbitron data in the first two People Meter markets. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
"RHF" wrote in message ups.com... On Sep 3, 9:31 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote: "Telamon" wrote in message ... That would only be a couple of blocks around the 50K station antenna with Eduardo's 10V/meter contour. Whatever that means. - You don't know what a 10 mv/m contour is? DE - According to you : The People that Count live with-in the 10mv/m Contour. The People that Do Not Count live out-side the 10mv/m Contour. - - - DXers being the a significant percentage of the People that Do Not Count. No, just simply stating the facts from tens of thousands of Arbitron diaries and ZIP code analysis of multiple markets... most listening to AM is inside the 10 mv/m contour. Outside, there is nearly no listening at all. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... So, you didn't take them up on their offer with a different radio? Nope, it was much larger, and defeated the purpose of having the little one. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
"RHF" wrote in message ps.com... Yes "HD" FM Radio does not deliever a good strong signal beyond the 54-60 dBu Contour an many areas with-in it too. And metro area FMs get essentially no analog listening beyond the 64 dBu contour. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
"Telamon" wrote in message ... So try again marketing hack. Explain the terms you use to express what it takes for good reception. "Good reception" is a perception of the listener, not a technical term. However, based on an enormous amount of data over many many years it can be seen that outside the 10 mv/m contours of an AM or outside the 64 dBu contours of an FM, listeners are not interested in tuning in to any station... there is very close to no reported listening, in fact. A good example, which obviates "well, at the fringe of a metro, there are less people to listen" is to take stations that do not fully cover the most densely populated parts of a metro. On FM, we have looked at over 30 survey periods in LA with a total sample of over 7000 persons per survey and plotted the returns for KRCD and KRCV, which are class A FMs. There is nearly no listening at home or at work outside the 64 dBu contours during the last 8 years, despite the stations frequently being in the top 10 (simulcast) in LA... all the listening is in a very small area. Years ago, we looked at the same thing for AMs in general, and found that the 10 mv/m was the barrier to sustained listening, and, of recent, perhaps the 15 mv/m is the limit where listeners consider a station listenable. People listen if the signal is strong, easy to tune, and free of nose, fading, etc. It's totally subjective, but can be easily quantified. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
"Telamon" wrote in message ... In article , "David Eduardo" wrote: "Telamon" wrote in message ... That would only be a couple of blocks around the 50K station antenna with Eduardo's 10V/meter contour. Whatever that means. You don't know what a 10 mv/m contour is? I don't know what YOU mean by 10 mV/m contour. Care to elaborate? Be sue not to mix up the u's and V's. You are doing the equivalent of a spelling flame.... nobody cares in this context which letters are capitalized. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... So, you didn't take them up on their offer with a different radio? Nope, it was much larger, and defeated the purpose of having the little one. MyFi has been re-released. I recommend it. So far, no disappointments in my own travels. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
On Sep 4, 9:27 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"RHF" wrote in message ps.com... - - Yes "HD" FM Radio does not deliever a good strong - - signal beyond the 54-60 dBu Contour an many areas - - with-in it too. - And metro area FMs get essentially no analog - listening beyond the 64 dBu contour. yeah Yeah YEAH ! - DE We Know We Know We Don't Count as a Sellable Number. AM Radio Listener 'life' exists beyond the 10mv/m Contour. FM Radio Listener 'life' exists beyond the 64 dBu Contour. all i see is the blinking blue light ~ RHF { life beyond the 10mv/m contour } |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
On Sep 5, 12:25 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"charlie" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: SNIP 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. Is that really true? Yep, comes right out of Arbitron data in the first two People Meter markets. You're in a pickle! |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
On Sep 5, 12:26 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"RHF" wrote in message ups.com... On Sep 3, 9:31 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote: "Telamon" wrote in message ... That would only be a couple of blocks around the 50K station antenna with Eduardo's 10V/meter contour. Whatever that means. - You don't know what a 10 mv/m contour is? DE - According to you : The People that Count live with-in the 10mv/m Contour. The People that Do Not Count live out-side the 10mv/m Contour. - - - DXers being the a significant percentage of the People that Do Not Count. No, just simply stating the facts from tens of thousands of Arbitron diaries and ZIP code analysis of multiple markets... most listening to AM is inside the 10 mv/m contour. Outside, there is nearly no listening at all.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Stop clinging to the technology of yesteryear. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
On Sep 5, 12:27 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"RHF" wrote in message ps.com... Yes "HD" FM Radio does not deliever a good strong signal beyond the 54-60 dBu Contour an many areas with-in it too. And metro area FMs get essentially no analog listening beyond the 64 dBu contour. Instead of posting here, you should be out trying to stop the loss of your younger listeners that's been going on for a long time now. You need to modernize! |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
On Sep 5, 12:35 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in message ... So try again marketing hack. Explain the terms you use to express what it takes for good reception. "Good reception" is a perception of the listener, not a technical term. However, based on an enormous amount of data over many many years it can be seen that outside the 10 mv/m contours of an AM or outside the 64 dBu contours of an FM, listeners are not interested in tuning in to any station... there is very close to no reported listening, in fact. A good example, which obviates "well, at the fringe of a metro, there are less people to listen" is to take stations that do not fully cover the most densely populated parts of a metro. On FM, we have looked at over 30 survey periods in LA with a total sample of over 7000 persons per survey and plotted the returns for KRCD and KRCV, which are class A FMs. There is nearly no listening at home or at work outside the 64 dBu contours during the last 8 years, despite the stations frequently being in the top 10 (simulcast) in LA... all the listening is in a very small area. Years ago, we looked at the same thing for AMs in general, and found that the 10 mv/m was the barrier to sustained listening, and, of recent, perhaps the 15 mv/m is the limit where listeners consider a station listenable. People listen if the signal is strong, easy to tune, and free of nose, fading, etc. It's totally subjective, but can be easily quantified. How can you expect us to follow your posts when we're running low on colloidal silver and the amazing HGH. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
David Eduardo wrote:
"IBOCcrock" wrote in message ps.com... On Sep 3, 3:55?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote: "IBOCcrock" wrote in message oups.com... The digital signals are only 1% of the analog - IBOC's coverage isn't even 50% that of analogs ! Digital has totally different properties than analog. I have seen plenty of data showing the HD signal, on a 3rd generation receiver, is robust beyond the "usable" signal range of analog AM or FM, which is the 10 mv/m AM curve and the 64 dbu FM contour. "A Station Owner's View of HD Radio Industry" "We were told back in the beginning that the HD coverage would be equal to the analog signal. Unfortunately, the industry is now finding out this is not the case, that the HD coverage is considerably less, something like 60% of the analog coverage. The HD signal is good in the same contours where about 96% to 97% of all AM and FM listening occur... in fact, it is good beyond those contours. Mr Eduardo: I have been following your posts and see why Radio is in the state it is in today. I realize that radio must make a profit, but, when you drive listeners away with this buzzing noise on AM and trying to turn FM into all talk or info-mericials. Tell us that "Young only listens to FM" etc. It can only be a recipe for future disaster. Example the young don't listen to AM because nothing is programed to their tastes. Talk in HD or Stereo is still talk, plus most young people care little about the news unless it affect them. Back in 1980 the number 1 station in my home town of Tucson was KT KT AM 990, until new owners took over the station, and to get the young to move to FM, They changed the format, fired the local DJ's and switched to satellite programs, sure enough in about two months time KTKT was in the bottom of the market. I remember reading their whinnying about no listers, they thought they could save money by eliminating the local talent. Now, AM is to old, demographics rares its head again, well radio as industry made it that way in allot of markets following the KTKT example. I know of very few listeners that carry a watt or decibel meter to determine if the signal is worth listening to, but when you have crappy programing, you lose the audience every time. Ken I PS You might want to point out to the Advertisers that due to the "BABY BOOM" generation the median age of the population is predicted to be in the mid-fifties in about five years, plus still have the most disposable income. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
On Sep 5, 9:34 am, K Isham wrote:
David Eduardo wrote: "IBOCcrock" wrote in message ups.com... On Sep 3, 3:55?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote: "IBOCcrock" wrote in message egroups.com... The digital signals are only 1% of the analog - IBOC's coverage isn't even 50% that of analogs ! Digital has totally different properties than analog. I have seen plenty of data showing the HD signal, on a 3rd generation receiver, is robust beyond the "usable" signal range of analog AM or FM, which is the 10 mv/m AM curve and the 64 dbu FM contour. "A Station Owner's View of HD Radio Industry" "We were told back in the beginning that the HD coverage would be equal to the analog signal. Unfortunately, the industry is now finding out this is not the case, that the HD coverage is considerably less, something like 60% of the analog coverage. The HD signal is good in the same contours where about 96% to 97% of all AM and FM listening occur... in fact, it is good beyond those contours. Mr Eduardo: I have been following your posts and see why Radio is in the state it is in today. I realize that radio must make a profit, but, when you drive listeners away with this buzzing noise on AM and trying to turn FM into all talk or info-mericials. Tell us that "Young only listens to FM" etc. It can only be a recipe for future disaster. Example the young don't listen to AM because nothing is programed to their tastes. Talk in HD or Stereo is still talk, plus most young people care little about the news unless it affect them. Back in 1980 the number 1 station in my home town of Tucson was KT KT AM 990, until new owners took over the station, and to get the young to move to FM, They changed the format, fired the local DJ's and switched to satellite programs, sure enough in about two months time KTKT was in the bottom of the market. I remember reading their whinnying about no listers, they thought they could save money by eliminating the local talent. Now, AM is to old, demographics rares its head again, well radio as industry made it that way in allot of markets following the KTKT example. I know of very few listeners that carry a watt or decibel meter to determine if the signal is worth listening to, but when you have crappy programing, you lose the audience every time. Ken I PS You might want to point out to the Advertisers that due to the "BABY BOOM" generation the median age of the population is predicted to be in the mid-fifties in about five years, plus still have the most disposable income.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - My theory: Tardo has developed a smokable, mind-altering form of colloidal silver. He now spends most of his time posting on usenet and smoking "silver" out of a glass pipe. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
"K Isham" wrote in message news:46deb07a@kcnews01... I realize that radio must make a profit, but, when you drive listeners away with this buzzing noise on AM "The buzzing noise" is heard on the channels adjacent to a local station with HD. No "other station" is protected from adjacent channel interference in the primary coverage are of the station using HD, and there is certainly, other than DX, no listening to adjacent channels. and trying to turn FM into all talk or info-mericials. Radio is an entertainment medium. That entertainment may be talk, music, or a combination. I see no evidence of extensive programming of infomercials on FM, anyway. Tell us that "Young only listens to FM" etc. It can only be a recipe for future disaster. This has been the case since the early 70's, where music listeners moved to FM and abandoned AM, even when major AM music stations were trying to compete. The difference in quality was a main reason for leaving; by 1977 half of all listening was to FM. Were it not for the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine, AM would be dead. As it is, talk formats have made the larger coverage stations viable still although much of the audience is old. Example the young don't listen to AM because nothing is programed to their tastes. Many AMs have tried music formats, and failed. This is simply because there are plenty of FM alternatives in most markets and nobody, today, wants to hear AM quality analog if FM is avaialble. On the other hand, there are plenty of viable small market music AMs that are doing well because there are not as many station choices in such markets and listeners are obligated to use AM for some formats. Talk in HD or Stereo is still talk, plus most young people care little about the news unless it affect them. So? In most parts of the US there are plenty of stations to have both; your statement about young people having no interest in news is, in a separate arena, sad. Back in 1980 the number 1 station in my home town of Tucson was KT KT AM 990, until new owners took over the station, KTKT has been owned by Lotus since 1972. There was no new owner. and to get the young to move to FM, They changed the format, fired the local DJ's and switched to satellite programs, sure enough in about two months time KTKT was in the bottom of the market. It was already at the bottom of the market, having been beaten in its format by an FM. The switch was to find a format that was viable. Plus, there was no way of knowing in 1980 "in two months" the changes in a station. There were ratings every Spring and Fall in Tucson then, and the interval between them was 6 months. I remember reading their whinnying about no listers, they thought they could save money by eliminating the local talent. Now, AM is to old, demographics rares its head again, well radio as industry made it that way in allot of markets following the KTKT example. Your example is fatally flawed. I know of very few listeners that carry a watt or decibel meter to determine if the signal is worth listening to, but when you have crappy programing, you lose the audience every time. Listeners know when a signal is "listenable" or not. When you look at hundreds of thousands of incidents of listening, and find that they seldom extend beyond a certain signal intensity, you can form pretty solid conclusions. PS You might want to point out to the Advertisers that due to the "BABY BOOM" generation the median age of the population is predicted to be in the mid-fifties in about five years, plus still have the most disposable income. But advertisers do not ask for 55+ listeners when they buy radio advertising. It does not matter what the nature of 55+ persons are... advertisers don't use radio to reach them. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
David Eduardo wrote:
"K Isham" wrote in message news:46deb07a@kcnews01... I realize that radio must make a profit, but, when you drive listeners away with this buzzing noise on AM "The buzzing noise" is heard on the channels adjacent to a local station with HD. No "other station" is protected from adjacent channel interference in the primary coverage are of the station using HD, and there is certainly, other than DX, no listening to adjacent channels. What you haven't addressed is when a local station is on someone else's adjacent, and their digital sidebands interfere with the local station's audio. THAT"s what's got so many people around here in a lather. The noise is everywhere. Keeps me from listening to WLS which is one of my locals. The truth is, that this system is designed with certain assumptions in mind. One is that there is no value to stations out of market. I'll tell you hear and now when lightning, or a power surge takes down one of the primary AM's here, and there's only digital hash from some out of market station covering up nearby information alternatives, the phrase, 'licensed to serve the in the public interest as a public trustee' takes on a laughable quality. The other major assumption is that some listeners can be orphaned without penalty. Both are tragically flawed. And if Radio doesn't pay heed, the listener decline will be dramatic, as they move to alternative media. I've been experimenting with a Wi-Fi radio, using one of the open nets in Gurnee. I can't get WLS at home because of digital interference, but I can over some wi-fi feed in the next suburb? What's wrong with this picture? And it's not a viable alternative for me. I do too much listening that requires a portable. Which is why I got a MyFi for satellite radio. And there's XM, of course. I also have an iPod adaptor in my Envoy that lets me control the iPod through the databuss. No wires, nothing in the way. But full selection without hassle to my entire music library. And XM, there, too. And with XM's new weekend schedule for XM Public Radio, I get my favorite shows in the order I want them, just as they used to be on WBEZ, without interference, without bull****...and without any over the air radio. So, I may soon, not miss WLS. I may find alternatives sufficient. And then where do you go. I provide some of the longest TSL's radio has ever seen. Meaning, advertisers get REAL value for what they spend when I'm listening. But, I'm 56. Who cares. Right? Let's see...in this post alone I've got more than a kilobuck in discretionary spending represented, of no value to anyone. Quite a resource to be wasted. You think I'm the only one? To quote a WWII Bugs Bunny cartoon, 'Wake up....it's later than you think." Now...I did speak to the PD at WLS...Kipper is a friend of mine, and used to work for me when I was programming downstate. He suggested I pick up the HD-2 stream on the FM. WLS is there. Ironic, isn't it? Not really a viable alternative, either...since I do a good deal of my listening while outdoors. ALL the money they spent attaching HD to WLS, and even on the inside, they suggest listeners pick up the HD stream on the FM? Trashing the AM band, Brother David, is not going to bring lower end demos. Younger people are not listening to AM because it's AM....they're not even GETTING to the sound quality, yet. Moving a viable AM to FM is a good move. Younger demos are already listening there. But going digital on AM isn't going to help. They're not going to go there. They haven't been for more than a generation, now. All you're doing is putting a digital alternative to the same programming they're not listening to, on a band they institutionally have no interest in. And you're doing it at the cost of those who DO listen. With instutrionalized interference, that, in the end, will cost you all your listeners. And all their revenue streams. HD on the FM is marginal. It's not the boon to sound quality claimed for it. On the average, it's not an improvement at all. But it does not create the kind of interference that HD AM does. HD on FM is more or less innoquous. HD-AM, however, is destructive. And does nothing but line the pockets of iBiquity stockholders. And those who propagate their propaganda. And it does so by depriving active, responsive listeners of their personal choices in listening. We may be comparitively few...but, as a whole we spend more. And when the interference REALLY kicks in...we're not going to be as few as you think. I'm all for Profit, David. But I expect something in return. I don't expect to see companies rewarded handsomely for depriving me of my choices. Yes, I can listen to something else. But I can't do it where I want, when I want. Actually, in the long vision, that's your loss more than it is mine. And I'm not alone. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
On Sep 5, 10:07 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"K Isham" wrote in messagenews:46deb07a@kcnews01... I realize that radio must make a profit, but, when you drive listeners away with this buzzing noise on AM "The buzzing noise" is heard on the channels adjacent to a local station with HD. No "other station" is protected from adjacent channel interference in the primary coverage are of the station using HD, and there is certainly, other than DX, no listening to adjacent channels. and trying to turn FM into all talk or info-mericials. Radio is an entertainment medium. That entertainment may be talk, music, or a combination. I see no evidence of extensive programming of infomercials on FM, anyway. Well, you're gonna have to do a lot better than human growth hormone and colloidal silver. I'll tell you that much! Tell us that "Young only listens to FM" etc. It can only be a recipe for future disaster. This has been the case since the early 70's, where music listeners moved to FM and abandoned AM, even when major AM music stations were trying to compete. The difference in quality was a main reason for leaving; by 1977 half of all listening was to FM. Were it not for the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine, AM would be dead. As it is, talk formats have made the larger coverage stations viable still although much of the audience is old. I wish I could make young people throw away their ipods and develop a burning interest in colloidal silver, but I can't. You just have to face the fact that infomercials are not going to turn the tide for you. Example the young don't listen to AM because nothing is programed to their tastes. Many AMs have tried music formats, and failed. This is simply because there are plenty of FM alternatives in most markets and nobody, today, wants to hear AM quality analog if FM is avaialble. On the other hand, there are plenty of viable small market music AMs that are doing well because there are not as many station choices in such markets and listeners are obligated to use AM for some formats. Yes, FM is beating your sorry behind. And yet you refuse to do anything about it. Talk in HD or Stereo is still talk, plus most young people care little about the news unless it affect them. So? In most parts of the US there are plenty of stations to have both; your statement about young people having no interest in news is, in a separate arena, sad. I guarantee you they're more interested in news than in your bizarro informercials. Back in 1980 the number 1 station in my home town of Tucson was KT KT AM 990, until new owners took over the station, KTKT has been owned by Lotus since 1972. There was no new owner. and to get the young to move to FM, They changed the format, fired the local DJ's and switched to satellite programs, sure enough in about two months time KTKT was in the bottom of the market. It was already at the bottom of the market, having been beaten in its format by an FM. Yes, notice the operative phrase he "Beaten by an FM" The switch was to find a format that was viable. Plus, there was no way of knowing in 1980 "in two months" the changes in a station. There were ratings every Spring and Fall in Tucson then, and the interval between them was 6 months. I remember reading their whinnying about no listers, they thought they could save money by eliminating the local talent. Now, AM is to old, demographics rares its head again, well radio as industry made it that way in allot of markets following the KTKT example. Your example is fatally flawed. I know of very few listeners that carry a watt or decibel meter to determine if the signal is worth listening to, but when you have crappy programing, you lose the audience every time. And when you add crappy programming to crappy audio, you're in a pickle! Listeners know when a signal is "listenable" or not. When you look at hundreds of thousands of incidents of listening, and find that they seldom extend beyond a certain signal intensity, you can form pretty solid conclusions. The conclusions are rock solid and they all indicate that you're in deep trouble. And yet you refuse to do anything about it. PS You might want to point out to the Advertisers that due to the "BABY BOOM" generation the median age of the population is predicted to be in the mid-fifties in about five years, plus still have the most disposable income. But advertisers do not ask for 55+ listeners when they buy radio advertising. It does not matter what the nature of 55+ persons are... advertisers don't use radio to reach them. And that is precisely my point. You had better make some serious changes going well beyond a digital paintjob. Otherwise your entire industry is sunk. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "K Isham" wrote in message news:46deb07a@kcnews01... I realize that radio must make a profit, but, when you drive listeners away with this buzzing noise on AM "The buzzing noise" is heard on the channels adjacent to a local station with HD. No "other station" is protected from adjacent channel interference in the primary coverage are of the station using HD, and there is certainly, other than DX, no listening to adjacent channels. What you haven't addressed is when a local station is on someone else's adjacent, and their digital sidebands interfere with the local station's audio. There are not many cases where the digital signal invades what is an adjacent channel to the extent that protected contours of the adjacent channel are interferred with someplace between the two stations. THAT"s what's got so many people around here in a lather. The noise is everywhere. Keeps me from listening to WLS which is one of my locals. Are you in the protected contour of WLS? The truth is, that this system is designed with certain assumptions in mind. One is that there is no value to stations out of market. The FCC's reasoning was that the US has so many stations now that listening in non-protected contour coverage areas, as real as it might be in the realm of possibility, did not deserve protection if the intent to transition radio to digital was to be fulfilled. And the use of night skywave coverage was similarly considered to be of marginal value, and of benefit to only a handful... around 1% of all AMs... of stations if used at all. I'll tell you hear and now when lightning, or a power surge takes down one of the primary AM's here, and there's only digital hash from some out of market station covering up nearby information alternatives, the phrase, 'licensed to serve the in the public interest as a public trustee' takes on a laughable quality. The FCC, since the 40's, has stressed localism... the primary reason why the clear channels were denied increases to 500 to 750 kw despite appeals ending around 1967. The FCC's focus is on service to the city or community of licence, not distant areas, and they have frequently denied protection at greater distances to grandfathered FMs even though many showed considerable listening in areas that were later granted local stations on adjacents. The other major assumption is that some listeners can be orphaned without penalty. Correct. This was considered in the deliberations and decided to be a justifiable tradeoff. Both are tragically flawed. And if Radio doesn't pay heed, the listener decline will be dramatic, as they move to alternative media. Listeners outside the local area or metro are of no value to stations, and this is why you don't see any type of significant broadcaster protest. The loss is not, to them, a loss. I've been experimenting with a Wi-Fi radio, using one of the open nets in Gurnee. I can't get WLS at home because of digital interference, but I can over some wi-fi feed in the next suburb? What's wrong with this picture? Are you in the Chicago MSA? (Cook, DuPage, Grundy, Kane, kendall, Lake, McHenry, Will, Lake and Porter counties in IL and Kenosha in WI)? Otherwise, the station itself probably does not care. So, I may soon, not miss WLS. I may find alternatives sufficient. And then where do you go. I provide some of the longest TSL's radio has ever seen. Meaning, advertisers get REAL value for what they spend when I'm listening. But, I'm 56. Who cares. Right? Let's see...in this post alone I've got more than a kilobuck in discretionary spending represented, of no value to anyone. Longer time spent listening listeners to AM talk tend to be over 55, and that is a demo that is essentially useless for revenue, although it looks nice on paper. there are just about zero agencie buys (and that drives the bigger stations in the larger markets) are for over 55. Now...I did speak to the PD at WLS...Kipper is a friend of mine, and used to work for me when I was programming downstate. He suggested I pick up the HD-2 stream on the FM. WLS is there. Ironic, isn't it? Not really a viable alternative, either...since I do a good deal of my listening while outdoors. HD portables are coming next year, when several low-battery consumption 9mm form factor chips are coming out that will enable portable devices. Trashing the AM band, Brother David, is not going to bring lower end demos. Younger people are not listening to AM because it's AM....they're not even GETTING to the sound quality, yet. The key 35-54 demos will listen to the AM formats if the quality is better; the staitons that have moved or started FM simulcasts have proven this. HD has a chance of making the existing formats on the very few viable AM stations in major markets more appealing to 35-54. Moving a viable AM to FM is a good move. Younger demos are already listening there. But going digital on AM isn't going to help. They're not going to go there. They haven't been for more than a generation, now. All you're doing is putting a digital alternative to the same programming they're not listening to, on a band they institutionally have no interest in. This is definitly one scenario. But to not try is simply to condemn AM to death in another decade when nearly all the listeners are over 55... the reason the FCC insisted, and was backed by the NAB in this, on an AM and FM solution was because the only way to help AM was to make it ride on a two-band system that all new receivers might have in the future. And you're doing it at the cost of those who DO listen. With instutrionalized interference, that, in the end, will cost you all your listeners. And all their revenue streams. As I have mentioned before, in LA we have, frequently, two of the top 5 stations in the Riverside San Bernardino market, which is separate from the LA market. We don't get any extra revenue from this, because radio is not bought by "adding" contiguous markets together. Out of market listening is not of much value. We may be comparitively few...but, as a whole we spend more. And when the interference REALLY kicks in...we're not going to be as few as you think. If the only loss is out of market or in 55+, there is no revenue loss. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
On Sep 5, 12:05 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in ... David Eduardo wrote: "K Isham" wrote in message news:46deb07a@kcnews01... I realize that radio must make a profit, but, when you drive listeners away with this buzzing noise on AM "The buzzing noise" is heard on the channels adjacent to a local station with HD. No "other station" is protected from adjacent channel interference in the primary coverage are of the station using HD, and there is certainly, other than DX, no listening to adjacent channels. What you haven't addressed is when a local station is on someone else's adjacent, and their digital sidebands interfere with the local station's audio. There are not many cases where the digital signal invades what is an adjacent channel to the extent that protected contours of the adjacent channel are interferred with someplace between the two stations. THAT"s what's got so many people around here in a lather. The noise is everywhere. Keeps me from listening to WLS which is one of my locals. Are you in the protected contour of WLS? The truth is, that this system is designed with certain assumptions in mind. One is that there is no value to stations out of market. The FCC's reasoning was that the US has so many stations now that listening in non-protected contour coverage areas, as real as it might be in the realm of possibility, did not deserve protection if the intent to transition radio to digital was to be fulfilled. And the use of night skywave coverage was similarly considered to be of marginal value, and of benefit to only a handful... around 1% of all AMs... of stations if used at all. I'll tell you hear and now when lightning, or a power surge takes down one of the primary AM's here, and there's only digital hash from some out of market station covering up nearby information alternatives, the phrase, 'licensed to serve the in the public interest as a public trustee' takes on a laughable quality. The FCC, since the 40's, has stressed localism... the primary reason why the clear channels were denied increases to 500 to 750 kw despite appeals ending around 1967. The FCC's focus is on service to the city or community of licence, not distant areas, and they have frequently denied protection at greater distances to grandfathered FMs even though many showed considerable listening in areas that were later granted local stations on adjacents. The other major assumption is that some listeners can be orphaned without penalty. Correct. This was considered in the deliberations and decided to be a justifiable tradeoff. Both are tragically flawed. And if Radio doesn't pay heed, the listener decline will be dramatic, as they move to alternative media. Listeners outside the local area or metro are of no value to stations, and this is why you don't see any type of significant broadcaster protest. The loss is not, to them, a loss. I've been experimenting with a Wi-Fi radio, using one of the open nets in Gurnee. I can't get WLS at home because of digital interference, but I can over some wi-fi feed in the next suburb? What's wrong with this picture? Are you in the Chicago MSA? (Cook, DuPage, Grundy, Kane, kendall, Lake, McHenry, Will, Lake and Porter counties in IL and Kenosha in WI)? Otherwise, the station itself probably does not care. So, I may soon, not miss WLS. I may find alternatives sufficient. And then where do you go. I provide some of the longest TSL's radio has ever seen. Meaning, advertisers get REAL value for what they spend when I'm listening. But, I'm 56. Who cares. Right? Let's see...in this post alone I've got more than a kilobuck in discretionary spending represented, of no value to anyone. Longer time spent listening listeners to AM talk tend to be over 55, and that is a demo that is essentially useless for revenue, although it looks nice on paper. there are just about zero agencie buys (and that drives the bigger stations in the larger markets) are for over 55. Now...I did speak to the PD at WLS...Kipper is a friend of mine, and used to work for me when I was programming downstate. He suggested I pick up the HD-2 stream on the FM. WLS is there. Ironic, isn't it? Not really a viable alternative, either...since I do a good deal of my listening while outdoors. HD portables are coming next year, when several low-battery consumption 9mm form factor chips are coming out that will enable portable devices. Trashing the AM band, Brother David, is not going to bring lower end demos. Younger people are not listening to AM because it's AM....they're not even GETTING to the sound quality, yet. The key 35-54 demos will listen to the AM formats if the quality is better; the staitons that have moved or started FM simulcasts have proven this. HD has a chance of making the existing formats on the very few viable AM stations in major markets more appealing to 35-54. Moving a viable AM to FM is a good move. Younger demos are already listening there. But going digital on AM isn't going to help. They're not going to go there. They haven't been for more than a generation, now. All you're doing is putting a digital alternative to the same programming they're not listening to, on a band they institutionally have no interest in. This is definitly one scenario. But to not try is simply to condemn AM to death in another decade when nearly all the listeners are over 55... the reason the FCC insisted, and was backed by the NAB in this, on an AM and FM solution was because the only way to help AM was to make it ride on a two-band system that all new receivers might have in the future. And you're doing it at the cost of those who DO listen. With instutrionalized interference, that, in the end, will cost you all your listeners. And all their revenue streams. As I have mentioned before, in LA we have, frequently, two of the top 5 stations in the Riverside San Bernardino market, which is separate from the LA market. We don't get any extra revenue from this, because radio is not bought by "adding" contiguous markets together. Out of market listening is not of much value. We may be comparitively few...but, as a whole we spend more. And when the interference REALLY kicks in...we're not going to be as few as you think. If the only loss is out of market or in 55+, there is no revenue loss. Yes, but what you have to realize is that the AM audience is aging and you are gradually bleeding off younger listeners. Unless you do something to correct this problem, there won't be a market. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "K Isham" wrote in message news:46deb07a@kcnews01... I realize that radio must make a profit, but, when you drive listeners away with this buzzing noise on AM "The buzzing noise" is heard on the channels adjacent to a local station with HD. No "other station" is protected from adjacent channel interference in the primary coverage are of the station using HD, and there is certainly, other than DX, no listening to adjacent channels. What you haven't addressed is when a local station is on someone else's adjacent, and their digital sidebands interfere with the local station's audio. There are not many cases where the digital signal invades what is an adjacent channel to the extent that protected contours of the adjacent channel are interferred with someplace between the two stations. THAT"s what's got so many people around here in a lather. The noise is everywhere. Keeps me from listening to WLS which is one of my locals. Are you in the protected contour of WLS? Yes. The truth is, that this system is designed with certain assumptions in mind. One is that there is no value to stations out of market. The FCC's reasoning was that the US has so many stations now that listening in non-protected contour coverage areas, as real as it might be in the realm of possibility, did not deserve protection if the intent to transition radio to digital was to be fulfilled. And the use of night skywave coverage was similarly considered to be of marginal value, and of benefit to only a handful... around 1% of all AMs... of stations if used at all. The FCC's reasoning is flawed. Assuptions that so many stations make all choices available to anyone through local outlets is tragically flawed. Some content is simply not available locally in many areas. Removing choices in the effort to convert medium to digital modulation is not what Freedom of Choice and Serving in the Public Interest is about. It's about the commercial value of a broadcast property. Not that I'm opposed to making money in Radio, Lord knows I did ok...but I didn't do it by removing options to listening through intentional interference. I'll tell you hear and now when lightning, or a power surge takes down one of the primary AM's here, and there's only digital hash from some out of market station covering up nearby information alternatives, the phrase, 'licensed to serve the in the public interest as a public trustee' takes on a laughable quality. The FCC, since the 40's, has stressed localism... the primary reason why the clear channels were denied increases to 500 to 750 kw despite appeals ending around 1967. The FCC's focus is on service to the city or community of licence, not distant areas, and they have frequently denied protection at greater distances to grandfathered FMs even though many showed considerable listening in areas that were later granted local stations on adjacents. Which gets back to the point....denying listeners their choice, in favor of some arbitrary coverage map. Local listeners not interested in local offerings are denied their choice. Smaller markets where Rush may not be availble locally for instance, may be served by nearby larger markets. Denying the smaller market that choice is a grave disservice to the listeners of the smaller market. At some point, expendability begins to show dividends in the bottom line, if you're priorities are money....if not, expendability orphans significant numbers of listeners who may not be served. Which is contrary to the stated intent of the broadcast service. The other major assumption is that some listeners can be orphaned without penalty. Correct. This was considered in the deliberations and decided to be a justifiable tradeoff. Forgive me for saying this...but that thinking is bull****. That's as cavalier as denying phone service, gas, or electric service to rural customers because the lines are not profitable. At it's core, Broadcast is a utility. And every citizen has a right to be served. Information that's not available locally is not to be restricted for corporate profit. That would be like providing electric to a customer with operational limitations pursuant to a local agenda. Providing during specified hours, or at frequencies determined by profitability at the utilities discretion. Both are tragically flawed. And if Radio doesn't pay heed, the listener decline will be dramatic, as they move to alternative media. Listeners outside the local area or metro are of no value to stations, and this is why you don't see any type of significant broadcaster protest. The loss is not, to them, a loss. No, it's a loss to their listeners. Who are getting vocal as they get more directly shafted. What Radio has traditionally done is taken the position that Broadcasting is about Radio. Advertisers believe that radio is about Commerce. But no one is looking out for the listeners, who are the backbone of Radio. We carry the freight, David. Declaring listeners of 'no value to the station,' is a dangerous position to take. And with rising popularity of alternatives, and slowing revenue growth, or in some cases, declining growth, taking a self-serving position is precisely the wrong position for Radio to take. Things may be good now. But they will not stay that way. I've been experimenting with a Wi-Fi radio, using one of the open nets in Gurnee. I can't get WLS at home because of digital interference, but I can over some wi-fi feed in the next suburb? What's wrong with this picture? Are you in the Chicago MSA? (Cook, DuPage, Grundy, Kane, kendall, Lake, McHenry, Will, Lake and Porter counties in IL and Kenosha in WI)? Otherwise, the station itself probably does not care. Lake County, Actually. Yes. As are a couple of members of this Newsgroup. So, I may soon, not miss WLS. I may find alternatives sufficient. And then where do you go. I provide some of the longest TSL's radio has ever seen. Meaning, advertisers get REAL value for what they spend when I'm listening. But, I'm 56. Who cares. Right? Let's see...in this post alone I've got more than a kilobuck in discretionary spending represented, of no value to anyone. Longer time spent listening listeners to AM talk tend to be over 55, and that is a demo that is essentially useless for revenue, although it looks nice on paper. there are just about zero agencie buys (and that drives the bigger stations in the larger markets) are for over 55. Now...I did speak to the PD at WLS...Kipper is a friend of mine, and used to work for me when I was programming downstate. He suggested I pick up the HD-2 stream on the FM. WLS is there. Ironic, isn't it? Not really a viable alternative, either...since I do a good deal of my listening while outdoors. HD portables are coming next year, when several low-battery consumption 9mm form factor chips are coming out that will enable portable devices. Trashing the AM band, Brother David, is not going to bring lower end demos. Younger people are not listening to AM because it's AM....they're not even GETTING to the sound quality, yet. The key 35-54 demos will listen to the AM formats if the quality is better; the staitons that have moved or started FM simulcasts have proven this. No, they haven't. They've proven that they will listen to FM, where they already are. Many won't listen to AM because it's AM. It's old. It's dark, it's history. They haven't even gotten to the issue of audio quality. They're not even going to sample it. HD has a chance of making the existing formats on the very few viable AM stations in major markets more appealing to 35-54. No, it won't. Because quality is not driving the listening. Content is. And if they're not going to AM because it's not AM, then they won't even give AMHD a serious audition. Especially when they have FM....and everybody listens to FM. Perception may not be reality, but it does influence most of consumer behaviour. And AM is perceived as a dinosaur. FM is percieved as "Radio." Moving to HD on AM will not produce significant listening behaviour change in lower demos. Moving a viable AM to FM is a good move. Younger demos are already listening there. But going digital on AM isn't going to help. They're not going to go there. They haven't been for more than a generation, now. All you're doing is putting a digital alternative to the same programming they're not listening to, on a band they institutionally have no interest in. This is definitly one scenario. But to not try is simply to condemn AM to death in another decade when nearly all the listeners are over 55... the reason the FCC insisted, and was backed by the NAB in this, on an AM and FM solution was because the only way to help AM was to make it ride on a two-band system that all new receivers might have in the future. Implementing any system that creates audible interference, is not the way. Not only is AM HD doomed, but current AM's demise is being hastened by the shortsighted implementation of IBOC. You can't build traffic where consumers have, for cause, historically not gone by changing internal workings. They're never going to know...because they're not going there. And you're doing it at the cost of those who DO listen. With instutrionalized interference, that, in the end, will cost you all your listeners. And all their revenue streams. As I have mentioned before, in LA we have, frequently, two of the top 5 stations in the Riverside San Bernardino market, which is separate from the LA market. We don't get any extra revenue from this, because radio is not bought by "adding" contiguous markets together. Out of market listening is not of much value. To Radio, perhaps. But what about the listeners who commute from LA to San Bernardino? You going to orphan them, too? Now, those are YOUR listeners. But they're moving out of prime contours every day. They're going to want to take their favorite station with them. You don't care about them? Then you deserve to fail. We may be comparitively few...but, as a whole we spend more. And when the interference REALLY kicks in...we're not going to be as few as you think. If the only loss is out of market or in 55+, there is no revenue loss. Someone made a killing off me in technology sales in this post alone. How is that not a loss? You're seeing this from the position that advertisers tell you to take. I drop a huge sum every week in discretionary. And according to the census, I"m far from alone. How is not marketing to me and my kind not a loss? Just the list of participants in this newsgroup alone, TODAY, represents 6 figures in consumer electronics. How is ignoring that not a loss? Inside Radio it's all a numbers game. Because it works. Those of us outside the radio station are not numbers. And we represent awesome commercial actitivy. Right now, the numbers may be in your favor. But that's changing. And as the economy settles, and population reconstitutes, it can and will change dramatically, and suddenly. Take off the corporate suit, step away from your numbers, and walk as a listener for a week. See if your numbers take into account where you go that takes you out of contour, but where you still want your radio station with you. And then when that's taken away....see if you don't begin to see what we're saying here. The Clears were not just about coast to coast radio. And as you yourself have pointed out, 50 gallons isn't enough to cover most large metros anymore. We're a mobile society. What the big watt blowtorches need to keep is that fringe coverage, so their loyal listeners in town, can take them where they go on evenings and weekends out of contour....in suburbs. In near weeds. Cutting off loyal listeners who want to take you along gives them exposure to other options. From which, many do not return. See what I'm saying? |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
Ventura is not the real name of any City or Town in California
(California, a fantasy name) I am a Mississippian.Try me out, California.I will leave y'all sittin at the Post! cuhulin |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Are you in the protected contour of WLS? What is the interferring station? I'm curious about this, and I'm surprised in this case that WLS has not taken advantage of the provisions for interference resolution that the FCC established. Which gets back to the point....denying listeners their choice, in favor of some arbitrary coverage map. Local listeners not interested in local offerings are denied their choice. But the FCC has stressed localism and local stations for about 60 years. In one case, one dear to me, KLVE 107.5 in LA was top 10 in Santa Barbara (MSA) based on coverage of the highly grandfatered 29 kw signal atop Mt. Wilson. However, the FCC protects grandfathered FMs to the extent of the conforming class B signal and proceeded a couple of years ago to license a new staiton on 107.7 in the market, completely eliminating the considerable KLVE listening. The FCC shows in many more such cases that serendipitous reception is neither of their interest nor concern. And it has not been for decades; they go by a strict technical interpretation of allocations. That's as cavalier as denying phone service, gas, or electric service to rural customers because the lines are not profitable. Yet in these cases, the government had to subsidize such services, such as by the taxes city dwellers pay on the phone bill for rural services, today and in the past. Sort of like farm subsidies... At it's core, Broadcast is a utility. And every citizen has a right to be served. Information that's not available locally is not to be restricted for corporate profit. The FCC would restrict this to local service, and they would likely say that with over 13000 stations, nobody is denied service. That would be like providing electric to a customer with operational limitations pursuant to a local agenda. Providing during specified hours, or at frequencies determined by profitability at the utilities discretion. In the vast majority of locations, there is far more local service. When I was in the Traverse City, MI, market, 20 miles north of that city, we had daytime reception of two AMs and no FM (1960) and at night, got the Chicago clears and WJR. Today, the market has over a dozen signals, all of which cover with 64 dbu (FM) or 10 mv/m (AM) signals the location I was at. The key 35-54 demos will listen to the AM formats if the quality is better; the staitons that have moved or started FM simulcasts have proven this. No, they haven't. They've proven that they will listen to FM, where they already are. Many won't listen to AM because it's AM. It's old. It's dark, it's history. They haven't even gotten to the issue of audio quality. They're not even going to sample it. 35+ will listen to AM. In some cases, like sports, where there are no FM alternatives, stations like The ticket in Dallas are top 5 25-54. Enhancing the quality of AM for the over-35's will work. The real issue is that it may be too late, as talk is rather rapidly migrating to FM (two this week alone). But what about the listeners who commute from LA to San Bernardino? You going to orphan them, too? Now, those are YOUR listeners. But they're moving out of prime contours every day. They're going to want to take their favorite station with them. You don't care about them? To show in the LA book, they have to have residences in LA or Orange counties. A ratings participant is determined by the market they live in (the address where the diary is delivered or the PPM is installed) and it does not matter where they go in the daytime. However, if a person goes beyond the limits of a useful signal for work or whatever, they won't listen anyhow. It's not about serving those lesser-signal areas... it is about listeners who will not listen to weaker signals, as proven by extensive studies of ratings respndents. Someone made a killing off me in technology sales in this post alone. How is that not a loss? You're seeing this from the position that advertisers tell you to take. I drop a huge sum every week in discretionary. And according to the census, I"m far from alone. I asked several General Managers how many 55+ buys came up so far this year in several top 10 markets (agencies ask for quotes so stations know about all business that is coming up) and was told, "none." We can not create demand for something advertisers do not want. How is not marketing to me and my kind not a loss? Just the list of participants in this newsgroup alone, TODAY, represents 6 figures in consumer electronics. How is ignoring that not a loss? There is no money against 55+, unless it is in direct sales in smaller markets or unrated markets. Agencies don't, as a rule, buy 55+ at all. Take off the corporate suit, step away from your numbers, and walk as a listener for a week. See if your numbers take into account where you go that takes you out of contour, but where you still want your radio station with you. Like any other listener, if the station sounds noisy or fades or has multipath, I change station. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
On Sep 5, 2:25 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in ... Are you in the protected contour of WLS? What is the interferring station? I'm curious about this, and I'm surprised in this case that WLS has not taken advantage of the provisions for interference resolution that the FCC established. Which gets back to the point....denying listeners their choice, in favor of some arbitrary coverage map. Local listeners not interested in local offerings are denied their choice. But the FCC has stressed localism and local stations for about 60 years. In one case, one dear to me, KLVE 107.5 in LA was top 10 in Santa Barbara (MSA) based on coverage of the highly grandfatered 29 kw signal atop Mt. Wilson. However, the FCC protects grandfathered FMs to the extent of the conforming class B signal and proceeded a couple of years ago to license a new staiton on 107.7 in the market, completely eliminating the considerable KLVE listening. The FCC shows in many more such cases that serendipitous reception is neither of their interest nor concern. And it has not been for decades; they go by a strict technical interpretation of allocations. That's as cavalier as denying phone service, gas, or electric service to rural customers because the lines are not profitable. Yet in these cases, the government had to subsidize such services, such as by the taxes city dwellers pay on the phone bill for rural services, today and in the past. Sort of like farm subsidies... At it's core, Broadcast is a utility. And every citizen has a right to be served. Information that's not available locally is not to be restricted for corporate profit. The FCC would restrict this to local service, and they would likely say that with over 13000 stations, nobody is denied service. That would be like providing electric to a customer with operational limitations pursuant to a local agenda. Providing during specified hours, or at frequencies determined by profitability at the utilities discretion. In the vast majority of locations, there is far more local service. When I was in the Traverse City, MI, market, 20 miles north of that city, we had daytime reception of two AMs and no FM (1960) and at night, got the Chicago clears and WJR. Today, the market has over a dozen signals, all of which cover with 64 dbu (FM) or 10 mv/m (AM) signals the location I was at. The key 35-54 demos will listen to the AM formats if the quality is better; the staitons that have moved or started FM simulcasts have proven this. No, they haven't. They've proven that they will listen to FM, where they already are. Many won't listen to AM because it's AM. It's old. It's dark, it's history. They haven't even gotten to the issue of audio quality. They're not even going to sample it. 35+ will listen to AM. In some cases, like sports, where there are no FM alternatives, stations like The ticket in Dallas are top 5 25-54. Enhancing the quality of AM for the over-35's will work. The real issue is that it may be too late, as talk is rather rapidly migrating to FM (two this week alone). But what about the listeners who commute from LA to San Bernardino? You going to orphan them, too? Now, those are YOUR listeners. But they're moving out of prime contours every day. They're going to want to take their favorite station with them. You don't care about them? To show in the LA book, they have to have residences in LA or Orange counties. A ratings participant is determined by the market they live in (the address where the diary is delivered or the PPM is installed) and it does not matter where they go in the daytime. However, if a person goes beyond the limits of a useful signal for work or whatever, they won't listen anyhow. It's not about serving those lesser-signal areas... it is about listeners who will not listen to weaker signals, as proven by extensive studies of ratings respndents. Someone made a killing off me in technology sales in this post alone. How is that not a loss? You're seeing this from the position that advertisers tell you to take. I drop a huge sum every week in discretionary. And according to the census, I"m far from alone. I asked several General Managers how many 55+ buys came up so far this year in several top 10 markets (agencies ask for quotes so stations know about all business that is coming up) and was told, "none." We can not create demand for something advertisers do not want. How is not marketing to me and my kind not a loss? Just the list of participants in this newsgroup alone, TODAY, represents 6 figures in consumer electronics. How is ignoring that not a loss? There is no money against 55+, unless it is in direct sales in smaller markets or unrated markets. Agencies don't, as a rule, buy 55+ at all. Take off the corporate suit, step away from your numbers, and walk as a listener for a week. See if your numbers take into account where you go that takes you out of contour, but where you still want your radio station with you. Like any other listener, if the station sounds noisy or fades or has multipath, I change station. Would you like a glass of colloidal silver with that? |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote: "Telamon" wrote in message ... In article , "David Eduardo" wrote: "Telamon" wrote in message . .. That would only be a couple of blocks around the 50K station antenna with Eduardo's 10V/meter contour. Whatever that means. You don't know what a 10 mv/m contour is? I don't know what YOU mean by 10 mV/m contour. Care to elaborate? Be sue not to mix up the u's and V's. You are doing the equivalent of a spelling flame.... nobody cares in this context which letters are capitalized. Nope. This is not a spelling flame. You explained that you do not know the difference between u meaning micro or 10E-6 and V or volts which is a unit. Quote "dBu used to be called dBv but got confused with dBV, and was changed. It's a decibel measurement of voltage.... as my equivalency shows." This is not a typo. You do not understand the technical terms you use. You do not understand what 10 mV/m means. They are just terms you have read and regurgitate with no understanding of what they mean. Thanks for demonstrating once again that you do not know what you are talking about. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote: "Telamon" wrote in message ... So try again marketing hack. Explain the terms you use to express what it takes for good reception. "Good reception" is a perception of the listener, not a technical term. It can and is quantified. However, based on an enormous amount of data over many many years it can be seen that outside the 10 mv/m contours of an AM or outside the 64 dBu contours of an FM, listeners are not interested in tuning in to any station... there is very close to no reported listening, in fact. You don't know what 10mV/m or 64 dBu mean. You don't understand the difference between units and multipliers. A good example, which obviates "well, at the fringe of a metro, there are less people to listen" is to take stations that do not fully cover the most densely populated parts of a metro. On FM, we have looked at over 30 survey periods in LA with a total sample of over 7000 persons per survey and plotted the returns for KRCD and KRCV, which are class A FMs. There is nearly no listening at home or at work outside the 64 dBu contours during the last 8 years, despite the stations frequently being in the top 10 (simulcast) in LA... all the listening is in a very small area. Years ago, we looked at the same thing for AMs in general, and found that the 10 mv/m was the barrier to sustained listening, and, of recent, perhaps the 15 mv/m is the limit where listeners consider a station listenable. Snip Stop using technical terms you don't understand to make a point. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
In article
, D Peter Maus wrote: David Eduardo wrote: "D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Are you in the protected contour of WLS? What is the interferring station? I'm curious about this, and I'm surprised in this case that WLS has not taken advantage of the provisions for interference resolution that the FCC established. I don't know which station it is. You, in fact, last year, were going to send your engineers out to take some readings on this. Never heard from you on it. Snip Reading are not important to a marketing hack. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
David "I can't help but pose as 'Eduardo' because I have no real grip on reality", wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Weren't you in Traverse City when you'd already claimed to be "living" in Mexico? No, that was a summer job at WCCW as board op for the Spanish show from about 1960 to 1962. Uh-Huh. dxAce Michigan USA |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
On Sep 6, 12:09 pm, dxAce wrote:
David "I can't help but pose as 'Eduardo' because I have no real grip on reality", wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Weren't you in Traverse City when you'd already claimed to be "living" in Mexico? No, that was a summer job at WCCW as board op for the Spanish show from about 1960 to 1962. Uh-Huh. dxAce Michigan USA That's not the first time he's been caught in a lie. He also lied about his job title. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
David Eduardo wrote:
The main reason advertisers do not target 55+ customers is that the return on investment is low; it takes so much more advertising to convince older consumers that the cost of the sale is less than the profit on the sale. You think that may have something to do with the way the sale is presented? Those of us who've been around the block once or twice, don't fall prey to the marketing pap that younger demographics seem to swallow so readily. Maybe if you sold the steak instead of the sizzle, you may find that we're a lot more amenable to the message. There's a story circulating around Radio Shacks in the Chicago area (and some areas of Louisiana, as well), about the guy who comes in, and when a saleshole asks if he can help, the guy says, "Yes, see that open space over by the Sprint display? Go stand there until my car has left the parking lot." I can quote that accurately, because I'm the one who said it. And I've said it at Best Buy, Circuit City, Audio Consultants...or wherever someone with more attitude than knowledge tries to sell me something I don't want. Truth is, I"m the easiest sell in the world. But don't come to me with more mouth than brains and expect me to turn loose of a dollar. I'll abandon a purchase I've already decided to make before I encourage that kind of crap by paying a commission for it. I'll buy somewhere else. It's real simple. Tell the truth. Stop the hype, and just tell the truth. You'll find that there are a lot of us out there who will respond to that...and selling to us is easier than getting a morning erection. If it's costing you more to make the sale than you can make on the sale, then change your pitch. It's not like we don't have the money. And it's not like we don't spend it. It's that we don't spend with people who open their mouths with hype, deception and misdirection. Or as I also say to clerks who lead off with the wrong tack..."Don't come to me with a mouth full of bull**** and expect me to love your breath." This principle has applications in our own conversations, David. I've been around the business as long as you have. I've heard all the noise. I've heard all the facts. I've been there. I've watched the industry grow from an exciting frontier to a mature product, to a commodity sold like tomatoes at Jerry's in Niles. I hear your statistics. I've seen them myself. I"ve even used them in my own career. But, and I've said this to every sales mangler, general mangler, OM, PD and corporate suit I've ever worked with, "You know what they say about statistics and liars." If you want to convince me, make an argument that doesn't rely on tautologically derived statistics. Talk to me like we're both human beings. With similar experiences, interests, passions and professional histories. Like the guy at Best Buy, you come to me with a lot of noise, but very little actual address of my questions and concerns. You're more dismissive than conversational. You're better than that. And I don't deserve it. Just like making a sale to 55+, you need to stop the hype, and just tell the truth. One on one. Person to person. Not suit to suit. I had one professor at University who didn't for the first semester use one mathematical formula in my Physics class. He had a very compelling reason for that. He told us that Mathematics is a shorthand for English. It's a language. And that a formula is a sentence. And that there is nothing you can say mathematically that you can't say in English. But Mathematics is shorthand. You don't have to really know what you're doing to use it. So to ensure that he knew that we understood what we were exposed to, he forbade mathematics in class for the first semester. Even on tests. We had to say it in English. And still come up with the correct answers. But we had to write it, say it, express it without mathematical formulas. If you want to convince us, here...and we're all passionate about Radio... say it in English. Talk to us like we're really here, really involved and really listeners. Sell us, without the hype. Without the statistics. Just tell the truth in plain English, as though you were speaking to a group of your friends at a Shakeys around two pitchers and an 18" Sweep-the-Kitchen. You may find, like sales people all over the country, that we respond to that. Put more simply: If you want to convince us to buy, don't sell like Herb Tarlek. You don't impress me as a '75 Cordoba kind of guy, anyway. Try taking this thinking to your advertisers. If you can convince them to monetize this demographic, with all it's disposable income....you'll be a hero. Retire wealthy beyond words, and leave a legacy with radio and it's listeners that's tacit goal of every broadcaster who ever sits behind a mic. You'll also be responsible for reinvigorating Radio at a time when it's running off its listeners to alternatives who don't treat us like dog **** on the sole of their boots. |
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
dxAce wrote: David "I can't help but pose as 'Eduardo' because I have no real grip on reality", wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Weren't you in Traverse City when you'd already claimed to be "living" in Mexico? No, that was a summer job at WCCW as board op for the Spanish show from about 1960 to 1962. Uh-Huh. David Eduardo wrote: Hell, also not mentioned was working all summer at WFAB in Miami in, I think, 1961. It was the sister station of where I worked in Cleveland, and I wanted to be there as it was a Spanish language station! I also worked summer of '59 and '60 if I remember the years at WCCW in Traverse City, ... dxAce Michigan USA |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:00 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com