David "I'm pretty much stuck promoting crap since I adopted the 'Eduardo'
shtick, wrote:

"Steve" wrote in message
ps.com...

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


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

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

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

Frackeltonian Thinking at its best!

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

ps.com...



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

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

Quite the contrary? What is contrary to what? You seem to be replying
to someone else's post.

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

ps.com...



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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

ps.com...



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

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

Quite the contrary? What is contrary to what? You seem to be replying
to someone else's post.


"Quite the contrary" to what you said my thought process is.

I now see HD as perhaps the _only_ hope for AM radio to survive.

David "Even though it's a holiday, I'm gonna shill as though it were a regular
workday. I've no choice since I got into this 'Eduardo' bag", wrote:

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

ps.com...



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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

Frackeltonian Thinking, yet again.

David "Shilling is now my entire life, ever since I became 'Eduardo'", wrote:

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

ps.com...



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

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

Quite the contrary? What is contrary to what? You seem to be replying
to someone else's post.


"Quite the contrary" to what you said my thought process is.

I now see HD as perhaps the _only_ hope for AM radio to survive.

Wow... even more Frackeltonian Thinking!

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

ps.com...



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

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

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

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

INSIDERADIO: "INSIDE STORY: News/Talk/Sports: Radio's Last Bastion"

"Music FMs of any flavor are utterly screwed... Which is why News/Talk/
Sports is radio's last bastion... Right now -- while FMs are losing
the music audience to new media -- satellite radio is offering more
News/Talk/Sports programming than we can fit on AM radio...
Accordingly, I urge owners of AM/FM clusters which include a News/Talk/
Sports AM to drop an FM music format and simulcast the News/Talk/
Sports AM... Imagine how smart you will look if -- suddenly -- your
entire market can now hear the News/Talk/Sports assets which are
radio's most-Sales-friendly programming..."

http://ftp.media.radcity.net/ZMST/daily/IS031005.htm

Claiming that AM radio is dying, when the music FMs are screwed - yea,
IBOC, with its jamming and poor coverage, is going to same AM ! You
are nothing more than an IBOC shill-parrot !

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

ups.com...





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

oups.com...

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

- Show quoted text -

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

On Sep 3, 1:01 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

ups.com...





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

oups.com...

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

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

Quite the contrary? What is contrary to what? You seem to be replying
to someone else's post.

"Quite the contrary" to what you said my thought process is.

I now see HD as perhaps the _only_ hope for AM radio to survive.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, if your aren't able to bring AM back, see what you can do about
the horse and buggy. I think that if you just put a better suspension
in some of those old buggys, people would start using them again.
Young people won't tolerate poor suspensions.

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


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.

Frackeltonian Thinking, yet again.


Nope, not any single person's thinking. It is the data from Arbitron in the
first two People Metered markets.