Apparently the FCC says flamethrowers are expected to serve beyond
their groundwave contours.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_channel

On Oct 1, 9:20 am, David wrote:

Apparently the FCC says flamethrowers are expected to
serve beyond their groundwave contours.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_channel



It doesn't say that. It says: "In 1980, the FCC voted to limit the
protection for the twenty-five clear channel stations to a 750 mile
radius around the transmitter."

It says NOTHING about clearchannels *having* to send out that far.

On Oct 1, 10:21 am, wrote:
On Oct 1, 9:20 am, David wrote:



Apparently the FCC says flamethrowers are expected to
serve beyond their groundwave contours.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_channel

It doesn't say that. It says: "In 1980, the FCC voted to limit the
protection for the twenty-five clear channel stations to a 750 mile
radius around the transmitter."

It says NOTHING about clearchannels *having* to send out that far.

Do you have a life?

On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 09:46:53 -0700, IBOCcrock
wrote:

On Oct 1, 10:21 am, wrote:
On Oct 1, 9:20 am, David wrote:



Apparently the FCC says flamethrowers are expected to
serve beyond their groundwave contours.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_channel

It doesn't say that. It says: "In 1980, the FCC voted to limit the
protection for the twenty-five clear channel stations to a 750 mile
radius around the transmitter."

It says NOTHING about clearchannels *having* to send out that far.

Do you have a life?

it would seem he does why do you ask?

"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

On Oct 1, 9:46 am, IBOCcrock wrote:
On Oct 1, 10:21 am, wrote:

On Oct 1, 9:20 am, David wrote:

Apparently the FCC says flamethrowers are expected to
serve beyond their groundwave contours.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_channel

It doesn't say that. It says: "In 1980, the FCC voted to limit the
protection for the twenty-five clear channel stations to a 750 mile
radius around the transmitter."

It says NOTHING about clearchannels *having* to send out that far.

- Do you have a life?

SFTV is our new 'superhero' "Hybrid Digital" Man. ~ RHF

--
William Smith
Indiana
IC-746, FRG-100
1500 foot longwire

"IBOCcrock" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Oct 1, 10:21 am, wrote:
On Oct 1, 9:20 am, David wrote:



Apparently the FCC says flamethrowers are expected to
serve beyond their groundwave contours.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_channel

It doesn't say that. It says: "In 1980, the FCC voted to limit the
protection for the twenty-five clear channel stations to a 750 mile
radius around the transmitter."

It says NOTHING about clearchannels *having* to send out that far.

Do you have a life?


Doubtful that he does, I hope he enjoys his over priced ****ty HD Radio

On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 07:21:54 -0700, wrote:

On Oct 1, 9:20 am, David wrote:

Apparently the FCC says flamethrowers are expected to
serve beyond their groundwave contours.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_channel



It doesn't say that. It says: "In 1980, the FCC voted to limit the
protection for the twenty-five clear channel stations to a 750 mile
radius around the transmitter."

It says NOTHING about clearchannels *having* to send out that far.


That's exactly what it says. And it calls it secondary SERVICE. That
is the opposite of ignoring because they can't be monetized.

"David" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 07:21:54 -0700, wrote:

On Oct 1, 9:20 am, David wrote:

Apparently the FCC says flamethrowers are expected to
serve beyond their groundwave contours.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_channel



It doesn't say that. It says: "In 1980, the FCC voted to limit the
protection for the twenty-five clear channel stations to a 750 mile
radius around the transmitter."

It says NOTHING about clearchannels *having* to send out that far.


That's exactly what it says. And it calls it secondary SERVICE. That
is the opposite of ignoring because they can't be monetized.

The service defined here is referent to signal, not programming. There is no
requirement to serve skywave listeners, or listeners in a secondary contour,
however it is defined.

On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 07:04:32 -0700, "David Eduardo"
wrote:




The service defined here is referent to signal, not programming. There is no
requirement to serve skywave listeners, or listeners in a secondary contour,
however it is defined.


That is convoluted. No service is provided by a dead carrier.

"David" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 07:04:32 -0700, "David Eduardo"
wrote:




The service defined here is referent to signal, not programming. There is
no
requirement to serve skywave listeners, or listeners in a secondary
contour,
however it is defined.


That is convoluted. No service is provided by a dead carrier.

A "service area" is a place where a signal is receivable. "Service" to
listeners, per the FCC, is to the local community and the community of
license. There is no requirement to give service to all the service area.