In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

I think he believes his own noise and no he can't provide the link
because what he claims doesn't exist. At least not yet.

The info provided to iBiquity's owners is not public, so I am not giving you
a link. You will simply have to hold your water until Samsung ships low
power, lower cost chips in 2008.

You are full of it. The development was announced and then news about it
went to zero. That's not a good sign.

Most lies have a kernel of truth in them so they are believable. All I
know is every time a take a poke at what he posts the stick goes right
through the one layer of the "story" he tells. All that he posts seem
very illusionary in nature.

Nothing is like your insistence that listeners will put up with a bad AM
signal and listen, despite radio audience measurements that are universally
accepted showing no such thing occurs.

This shows you are a sham. You don't know what reception is like around
here AM or FM. You are full of it.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 07:27:45 GMT, Telamon
wrote:

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
.
..

I just do not believe your contention that the numbers of people
that listen to night time AMBCB are small. I think there is a
great deal of regional listening at night and non-local stations
during the day where reception is of good quality such as where
I live on the coast. There are plenty of people that listen to
stations that are not local in order to hear a program not
broadcast locally.

There are no facts to support your contention. Listening to out of
market stations is very small (by the way, Ventura, Riverside West
and San Bernardino West are all in the LA DMA... the metro
definition that matches the TV metro area). Still, in your county,
there is pretty limited in-market listening to out of market
stations.

You have no facts to support your contention since all the waking
hours revolve around the commercial radio books. The statistics you
look at don't address the regional listening. Now don't go back on
the word of your previous posts.

You have a mistaken impression of radio audience measurement.

Snip

You misrepresent the facts to support your arguments as needed. You tell
me I don't hear the stations I listen to because they are so weak as to
be DX and nobody would spend time listening to them. You are full of it.


his answer is mostly likely that counts and the station that is no one
in their market area

which leaves out DXers

"one useless man is disgrace 2 become a law firm 3 or more become a congress"
adams

woger you are a Congress all in your own head

http://kb9rqz.bravejournal.com/

and get ou the newly recovered KB9RQZ.blogspot.com as well

G

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
t...

A parallel would be the number of people who in the mid to late 80's into
the 90's built their own computers. There were parts places all over,
magazines filled with ads for cases and fans.... now there is nearly
nothing.


You're kidding, right? Those ads are everywhere. There are probably at least
as many people building their own computers now as there are buying
pre-built ones. In our house, there are exactly three pre-built desktop
machines (old Gateway minisystems I bought for next to nothing to use as
streaming machines). The other 6 desktop machines (mostly towers) are built
from discrete parts chosen for their particular merits. This is done by most
anyone into serious computing. Those that buy machines off the shelf are
usually doing so just to access e-mail and do a bit of web surfing.

On Sep 29, 9:30 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in message

...



I don't think it likely that Anytown USA would support 24 different
formats. Anytown USA may be more diverse than in the past but not to
that extent.

In most cases, we can already quantify the interest in the second tier
formats, and every market has room to have double the FM formats that it
currently has, and all can, if properly done, enough audience to make money.

The losers will be the limited coverage or rimshot FMs, and the AMs trying
to do on of the viable FM formats on the dead band.... those will have to
find something even more niche or disappear.



So, a station puts one of the viable second tier of formats on and
eventually, as the number of radios increases, they start seeing sales
results. It took FM from about 1940 to the mid-70s to be broadly
profitable,
so the wait for HD radios to improve and sell is a small consideration;
many
of the formats themselves will sell HD, such as country in New York... a
format that got a mid-1's share when on a major FM some time ago.

I don't see any radio stations promoting itself in multi-formats.
Currently listeners identify a station with a format.

The HD 2 channels are not identified with the main channel except as "102..9
HD2 is Tejano in Houston" type of IDs.



In my own sector, I can see at least 5 if not 10 missing Hispanic formats
in
LA alone... most of which would be good use of an HD channel.

Good grief there is more then 10? How many Hispanic formats are there?

More than there are in English, as we have the individual music forms of
nearly 20 nations, many of which are viable formats in different markets. An
example would be the Colombian population of Miami, of about 250,000. That
means there is room for both a Vallenato station, a Cumbia station and maybe
a traditional bambuco / folkloric music station, too. In LA, there are
several formats that would appeal only, but strongly, to Central Americans,
as well as Caribbean tropical, Spanish language rock, standards, all
grupera, all-norteña, oldies, 70's ballads, etc. There are 10 for you right
off the top of my head... all have been researched and are known second tier
formats that could get a one to two share on a decent FM... and will grow to
that on HD2's-.

There are already about a dozen Hispanic formats on, including Mexican
tropical, sports, news / talk, adult hits, AC, regional oldies, regional
hardcore, regional Mexican, Spanish CHR, variety, Christian and reggaetón.

d'Eduardo - Do they got Rush Limbaugh, Dr. Laura,
and Sean Hanney in Span-Glish ? ~ RHF
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanglish
.

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...
No, only the nutjobs like dxAss and Telamon and Steve refuse to realize
how radio is used today, and the changes the industry has to make to
survive... and that said survival will likely not include AM in the long
run.


Your vision of "radio" is not radio. It's a low power digital 'local'
service that forces everyone to buy new hardware to even make use of it.
Anyone can listen to "radio" on the same equipment they listened to it on
almost 90 years ago.

In article ,
D Peter Maus wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
D Peter Maus wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
dxAce wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...
SFTV_troy wrote:
I don't really understand why people are upset about the loss of
DX'ing over AM (only temporarily; it will be restored when AM goes
pure digital). You can still do DX'ing via using services like
shoutcast.com. Just yesterday at work I was listening to an
Australian station. Another favorite of mine is located in England.
DX'ing is still alive and well on the internet.
Uh... that's NOT DX'ing.

It may well become the DXing of the 21st Century.
Edwina, you're an idiot.
It just looks that way to us DxAce because you and I don't share the
level of self delusion that Eduardo has attained.


I honestly believe this is not delusion. I honestly believe he
believes this noise.

His comments blaming DXers for abandoning broadcasters, while
delineating precisely how broadcasters have developed their disdain for
DXers is evidence that he's really looking at snapshots of this party,
but not attending the party, itself. Taking the Broadcaster/Dxer enmity
out of chronological order, as he did, suggests that he's seeing what he
needs to focus on in order to justify his position, but not seeing a
good deal of the out-of-frame that gives the snapshot context. This is
common among manglement in Radio.

It's what used to be called not seeing the forest for the trees.

It's what pilots call flying instruments in VFR conditions: Paying so
much attention to the minutiae that they fail to look up and actually
see how the plane is being flown.

One of my mentors in the Physics department at UMSL used to say, as
the textbook he taught from explained, formulae and numbers are only
shorthand for English sentences. If you can't explain your case without
resorting to formulae and numbers, you can't explain your case.

Corporately, that is the equivalent of: If you can't convince someone
without quoting a policy, you're hiding behind a firewall because you
actually can't function amongst your clients/customers.

And if you notice, he doesn't really answer your questions,
Telamon...but like Johnny Cochran, he gives you the answer he would like
you to hear, whether it addresses your question or not.

Has he posted the link you've asked for yet?

There are several inconsistencies in our most recent discussion about
demographics and agencies. The kind of inconsistencies that someone with
major market experience in both sales and Manglement wouldn't have made.

And in these last discussions, about DXers and this thread about HD,
he's begun speaking openly out of both sides of his mouth, not only
contradicting himself but doing it with a kind of indignation that's
also inconsistent with someone of his knowledge and experience.

Someone made the statement, here, that a person of his stature and
position doesn't need the ego piece that is his website.

Perhaps, that's true. Although I know people in the business who are
still trying to prove something after 30 years in the big city. But when
you read it, and as Ace has pointed out several times that the content
of his website has changed more than once when his credentials were
called into question, it does give one reason to wonder not so much what
it is that's false, but what it is that may be true.

I think he believes his own noise and no he can't provide the link
because what he claims doesn't exist. At least not yet.

He has written some weird stuff like he has people around him looking
over his shoulder laughing at peoples critical responses to his posts on
Usenet as an attempt to bully the people critical of him. Very strange
he would need this imaginary support.

I have noted the deception and misdirection. It's madding.

Most lies have a kernel of truth in them so they are believable. All I
know is every time a take a poke at what he posts the stick goes right
through the one layer of the "story" he tells. All that he posts seem
very illusionary in nature.

At one time it seemed to me you thought he is for real. You still think
that way?



Yeah, I do. But, over the last few weeks, I've noticed some serious
inconsistencies in his positions. And, I've watched him, when pressed,
back away from his arguments. Now, sometimes we say things in the heat
of a moment, or when time is short, that may require some clarification.
But, I've noticed a consistent pattern of argumentation, and when
pressed for specifics, a termination of the discussion, so he can move
on to other things. Direct questions asked, but never addressed.
Specifics requested but never supplied. Your link request that was never
provided. And now, twice, in front of the group, he's promised to get
his engineers out here to take signal strength measurements at my
location to determine why I can't hear a local 50kw station, but
immediately dropped all conversation about it.

To date the only one who's bothered to investigate my reception
issues, is me.

Again, not terribly surprising. Not any of it. Most broadcasters, in
fact, most people in any profession are particularly good at spouting a
company line, but woefully inadequate at following through. Or directly
addressing matters that they feel are inconsequential to them, beneath
them, or in the most insidious cases, may threaten their position. A
lot of people I know are like this. You probably know some, too.

Yeah, they are generally middle managers. People to be avoided if you
want to get something done.

But, here of late, I've seen more of it than in months past. And I've
seen more attempts at abject dismissal, in lieu of substantive
conversation. Which I have seen more out of consultants, than actual
working frontline broadcasters. And some blatant inconsistencies in his
claims about agencies/sales. And his experience. These things make me
suspect that, though, he's still the David we've all come to know and
love, that he's getting low on the calm, educational patience he's
showed a year ago, and is now running out of both patience, and
appreciation of the intercourse.

Like the parent who, when set with a barrage of questions he/she no
longer wants to deal with, because he/she can't make a compelling case,
retreats into 'because I said so.'

He speaks a corporate line. He speaks a policy statement. He
speaks...well, he speaks like he's reading out of a textbook. But he
doesn't speak with a level of personal intimacy that someone with his
experience would employ. You and I, for instance, barely know each
other. And have only corresponded once or twice within the group. But,
here, you've asked a direct question based on existing conversation, but
with a level of personal interaction that David does not employ. You ask
me about what I think and whether or not it's changed. And you phrased
it in a very personal way. Two people exchanging ideas....one to the other.

But when David speaks, he speaks like a policy statement. There's
only a level of personal interaction after it's been brought to his
attention that there is none. Hell, even Eric Richards, with whom I
share no personal cordiality, will address a post as though he's talking
TO me, but not AT me. David doesn't do that. He speaks AT his opponent.
Overwhelming with statistics, where a conversational sentence will do.
Jumping into conversations with material that brings nothing to the
topic at hand, but definitely puts his expertise and policy positions on
display.

Like a textbook. Very much like a textbook. General practices,
expectations and limitatons. But no personal experiential variations on
the textbook case. And everyone, EVERYONE, has personal experiences
where the textbook doesn't tell the story.

Then there was the issue of his ham credentials. When pressed he
gave a credible story about corruption in the testing process in
Ecuador. Nothing out of the ordinary, actually. Nothing outside the
realm of possibility. Certainly, something we'd all believe based on the
politics of the region. But when pressed, he gave no clarification, with
any personal experiential content. Just something that sounds a likely
story.

Which is all, really, that he needs to present. If that. But all of
his stories sound like that. Textbook, obvious and not unexpected likely
stories, without any personal variations, or counterintuitive wrinkles.

Somewhere you'd expect some.

Colleagues, whether vocational or avocational, don't address each
other like that. He claims to be a DXer, but disdains DXers. He claims
to be an SWL, but contributes almost nothing to SW related
conversations. He keeps his content almost entirely on BC related
matters, and, again speaks not TO, but AT the topic. Like we're not
here. Or beneath him. Ignorant USENet savages, who could not be informed
if we could BUY a clue.

As I said, I've known people in the Radio business like that. But
then don't rise to the level of corporate oversight, or management. And
they are certainly not leaders. Usually they're middle manglement. And
consultants.

So, yeah, to answer your question, I think he's for real. I just
think he's not as good at keeping it real as he wants to believe.

Well he just made an important mistake posting about his area of
expertise that leads me to believe he is a faker just like some people
pretend to be a doctor or a cop. He may hold a position at Univision but
in reality does not belong there.

He knows some information but not enough to convince me he is who he
purports to be.

Then his arguments over my reception is so ignorant to the extent that I
just can't believe he lives or has visited LA for that matter. I mean
how much rope should I give him to hang himself anyway? The guy is full
of crap.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
. And now, twice, in front of the group, he's promised to get his engineers
out here to take signal strength measurements at my location to determine
why I can't hear a local 50kw station, but immediately dropped all
conversation about it.

And that, whille none of your business, is due to the fact that Paul Easter,
an talented and wonderful engineer, moved to a corporate position at Salem,
and we are short handed in the middle of two transmitter moves.

To date the only one who's bothered to investigate my reception issues,
is me.

Good for you.

. And some blatant inconsistencies in his claims about agencies/sales.

Your experiences of a decade or more ago have little to do with the current
situation, where interactive media is far more attractive to advertising
agencies than radio because there are more creative dollars to be made
there.

And his experience. These things make me suspect that, though, he's still
the David we've all come to know and love, that he's getting low on the
calm, educational patience he's showed a year ago, and is now running out
of both patience, and appreciation of the intercourse.

I'm out of patience with the people who insist that there is listening to
distant skywave signals, when there is no such thing documented and with
those who think AM is not on a horrible decline, with its main and majority
format, news talk, moving to FM. And I'm out of patience with you, who think
a radio station in 2007 can change the demos on a buy because he once saw a
station changed on a buy. I spoke with the head or our naitonal rep about
changing demos on a campaign, and she simply laughed.

But when David speaks, he speaks like a policy statement. There's only
a level of personal interaction after it's been brought to his attention
that there is none. Hell, even Eric Richards, with whom I share no
personal cordiality, will address a post as though he's talking TO me, but
not AT me. David doesn't do that. He speaks AT his opponent. Overwhelming
with statistics, where a conversational sentence will do. Jumping into
conversations with material that brings nothing to the topic at hand, but
definitely puts his expertise and policy positions on display.

When the responses I get are idiotic, I react as one does to an idiot. At
some point, it came to me that DXers were now enemies of radio stations...
which is when I dropped my Northamerican radio club memberships... because
supporting one's enemies with money is hardly rational. The inability of the
DX community to realize that AM has changed from a music medium to a talk
one, and that shows like Noory are necessary, and that technical changes
have to come if there is any chace of AM survival make the DXer a Luddite of
the first order.

Then there was the issue of his ham credentials. When pressed he gave a
credible story about corruption in the testing process in Ecuador. Nothing
out of the ordinary, actually. Nothing outside the realm of possibility.
Certainly, something we'd all believe based on the politics of the region.
But when pressed, he gave no clarification, with any personal experiential
content. Just something that sounds a likely story.

Drivers licences, visas, import permits, bulding permits, licences, tax
audits, etc., were all facilitated in a way that is accepted outside the US,
and not called "corrupt" as you have called it. It's just a different
system. And while I was there, there was no exam for a ham license at all...
you had to be sponsored by the RCE (Radio Club del Ecuador) or other of the
ham associations, and you got a license. My sponsor was Ing. Fred Simon.

But, with about 30 years of living outside the US, and even more working
there, I am used to US gringo standards being applied to other cultures as a
metric. Other cultures do not work like the American system, and can not be
compared to it, either.

Colleagues, whether vocational or avocational, don't address each other
like that. He claims to be a DXer, but disdains DXers.

Anyone with over 2000 AM veries has, I think, earned the right to be called
a DXer. But I am not a club member of any of the DX orgainzations because
the hobby, which led me into radio, now pretty universally hates
broadcasters and the very stations they listen to.

As I said, I've known people in the Radio business like that. But then
don't rise to the level of corporate oversight, or management. And they
are certainly not leaders. Usually they're middle manglement. And
consultants.

Of which I am neither.

Yeah, but we know you fake at least half of what you post.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
David wrote:

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 17:27:54 -0700, "David Eduardo"
wrote:



I suppose it was my idea to discontinue the R8B? There was not enough
market, you fool.

I think what happened was that they pretty much sold one to everybody
who wanted one over the series' extremely long run.

Probably not the case. My guess is the profit margin was to thin and
they wanted to spend their time on more profitable product. There are
many older technology type components that would continue to get more
expensive with time and they would need to redesign it just to keep
costs down. I noticed the price on a R8B kept going up the last few
years they made it. With the Asian competition and the engineering hours
needed probably tipped the scales in favor of dropping it. Drake would
probably be asking at $2K to $2.5K for an R8B if they were still making
it today.

Or, the simple answer: there is a huge decline in the number of SW stations,
and also in SW listeners. Domestic SW, the nicest DX, is all but
disappearing and the quality broadcasters are reducing schedules or
suspending service.

Yeah like you would know.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

David Eduardo wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

Perhaps, that's true. Although I know people in the business who are
still trying to prove something after 30 years in the big city. But when
you read it, and as Ace has pointed out several times that the content of
his website has changed more than once when his credentials were called
into question, it does give one reason to wonder not so much what it is
that's false, but what it is that may be true.

You called me an SOB, so it is my turn to call you one. The only thing on my
website that has changed in the last 4 years is the addition of a bunch of
old Radex, Whites and Stevenson's magazines.

Hogwash! Edweenie, you're a pathological liar.

David Eduardo wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
David wrote:

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 17:27:54 -0700, "David Eduardo"
wrote:



I suppose it was my idea to discontinue the R8B? There was not enough
market, you fool.

I think what happened was that they pretty much sold one to everybody
who wanted one over the series' extremely long run.

Probably not the case. My guess is the profit margin was to thin and
they wanted to spend their time on more profitable product. There are
many older technology type components that would continue to get more
expensive with time and they would need to redesign it just to keep
costs down. I noticed the price on a R8B kept going up the last few
years they made it. With the Asian competition and the engineering hours
needed probably tipped the scales in favor of dropping it. Drake would
probably be asking at $2K to $2.5K for an R8B if they were still making
it today.

Or, the simple answer: there is a huge decline in the number of SW stations,
and also in SW listeners. Domestic SW, the nicest DX, is all but
disappearing and the quality broadcasters are reducing schedules or
suspending service.

Or, maybe your 'simple' answer isn't true?