Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...



Didn't you say in the past that after going back to the US and/or Puerto
Rico
(after getting tossed) that you were still trying to sell your stations in
Ecuador?

No, I said that in '69, thinking I could sell, I worked briefly with Art
Keller as a manager at EZ Communications and had a deal to buy 25% for $100
k, but when I got back to Ecuador things were so bad that foreign currency
transactions were frozen and I could not do any deal. About then, I put the
talk AM on and made the mistake of speaking out against the government.

They did have airplanes back then, and I could come and go.

Now, in one rapid 24 hour period, you are telling us that you
*transferred* it
all to some employee cooperative, before you got tossed?

Did you do that at gunpoint as well?

No, I signed some documents with my lawyers, and they filed them within
hours. A socialist government could not go against a worker's cooperative, a
day old or a century old. I lost the stations, but not to the government. I
still grin when I imagine the faces of the military junta guys when they
realized they had a Catch 22 on their hands.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios willsave it!
 

On Jan 8, 7:44*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message

...



Didn't you say in the past that after going back to the US and/or Puerto
Rico
(after getting tossed) that you were still trying to sell your stations in
Ecuador?

No, I said that in '69, thinking I could sell, I worked briefly with Art
Keller as a manager at EZ Communications and had a deal to buy 25% for $100
k, but when I got back to Ecuador things were so bad that foreign currency
transactions were frozen and I could not do any deal. About then, I put the
talk AM on and made the mistake of speaking out against the government.

They did have airplanes back then, and I could come and go.


You probably sank to your knees and serviced some of the junta members
in the hope that they'd allow you to climb on board the rapidly
approaching gravy train. As soon as you were done, they had no further
use for you. And the gravy train? Darn it, wouldn't you know it was
overbooked...


Now, in one rapid 24 hour period, you are telling us that you
*transferred* it
all to some employee cooperative, before you got tossed?

Did you do that at gunpoint as well?

No, I signed some documents with my lawyers, and they filed them within
hours. A socialist government could not go against a worker's cooperative, a
day old or a century old. I lost the stations, but not to the government. I
still grin when I imagine the faces of the military junta guys when they
realized they had a Catch 22 on their hands.

The government went against the cooperative. So much for that story.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

Several audits in 43 years of filing returns is hardly a lot. Never paid
a
penny in additional charges, because I pay what I owe and pay it on time.

You, on the other hand, seem to know all about frequent audits.

How so? I've never been audited and most people only randomly get
audited once so the fact that it has happened to you a number of times
means you are raising red flags.

The frequency of audit increases dramatically for those in higher income
brackets. The frequency of audit increases dramatically for those filling
the long form. The frequency of audit increases dramatically for those
filing the self-employment income schedule. The frequency of audit increases
dramatically for those with high charitable contributions. Those with a high
number of claimed dependents get audited more often, too.

Those filing form EZ1040 with a W4 that matches the IRS computer seldom get
audited unless. Those with incomes over a half-million may get audited
routinely every few years.

That's a bunch of baloney. I told you I not been audited and my tax
situation is light years away from the easy tax forms and I know many
people that make millions a year don't get audited either.

So it's like I said. You are doing something that is questionable in the
eyes of the IRS. I'm not saying you are doing anything wrong but that
maybe you fit a profile that raises a flag.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Steve" wrote in message
...
On Jan 8, 12:09 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:

Funny how not one station in the market has made an FCC complaint,
listening
levels have not changed, and nobody else has mentioned this.

Plenty of people are talking about it. Perhaps the problem is that no
one is listening.

Describe a couple of these supposedly plentiful cases of NYC stations being
interferred with inside their interference free contours.

You can't because there are no cases.

The mere fact that the ratings, which came out 15 minutes ago, show no
changes in listening levels in the NY market, disproves your point.

This reminds me the argument we had where you posted that I had to be
lying about the signal strength of stations I was receiving on AMBCB.

You ever make it up this way with a portable radio?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

"Steve" wrote in message
...

No, I signed some documents with my lawyers, and they filed them within
hours. A socialist government could not go against a worker's cooperative,
a
day old or a century old. I lost the stations, but not to the government.
I
still grin when I imagine the faces of the military junta guys when they
realized they had a Catch 22 on their hands.

The government went against the cooperative. So much for that story.

Nope, not so. Cooperative operated 590 and 810 for about 30 years.
Foolishly, they abandoned the FM simulcast licenses and when AM started to
die in the larger cities of Ecuador, the stations went silent.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

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

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

Several audits in 43 years of filing returns is hardly a lot. Never
paid
a
penny in additional charges, because I pay what I owe and pay it on
time.

You, on the other hand, seem to know all about frequent audits.

How so? I've never been audited and most people only randomly get
audited once so the fact that it has happened to you a number of times
means you are raising red flags.

The frequency of audit increases dramatically for those in higher income
brackets. The frequency of audit increases dramatically for those filling
the long form. The frequency of audit increases dramatically for those
filing the self-employment income schedule. The frequency of audit
increases
dramatically for those with high charitable contributions. Those with a
high
number of claimed dependents get audited more often, too.

Those filing form EZ1040 with a W4 that matches the IRS computer seldom
get
audited unless. Those with incomes over a half-million may get audited
routinely every few years.

That's a bunch of baloney. I told you I not been audited and my tax
situation is light years away from the easy tax forms and I know many
people that make millions a year don't get audited either.

Most of the personal finance magazines have calculated the different odds of
audit at different income levels and with different types of filings.
Everything I listed increases the probability of audit. Self-employment is
also one of the major triggers, as it is one of the places income can be
understated.

So it's like I said. You are doing something that is questionable in the
eyes of the IRS. I'm not saying you are doing anything wrong but that
maybe you fit a profile that raises a flag.

Since both instances had to do with split tax years in Puerto Rico, that was
likely the reason. If one changes residence during the year, the portions of
the year lived in each tax jurisdiction are taxed separately and without
overlap, as with all other separate tax jurisdictions.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

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

"Steve" wrote in message
...
On Jan 8, 12:09 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:

Funny how not one station in the market has made an FCC complaint,
listening
levels have not changed, and nobody else has mentioned this.

Plenty of people are talking about it. Perhaps the problem is that no
one is listening.

Describe a couple of these supposedly plentiful cases of NYC stations
being
interferred with inside their interference free contours.

You can't because there are no cases.

The mere fact that the ratings, which came out 15 minutes ago, show no
changes in listening levels in the NY market, disproves your point.

This reminds me the argument we had where you posted that I had to be
lying about the signal strength of stations I was receiving on AMBCB.

You ever make it up this way with a portable radio?

Again, simply: Inside the 10 mv/m contour for AM and the 64 dbu contour for
FM is where about 95% of all listening takes place, irrespective of whether
the areas beyond the contour are highly populated or rural. Listeners do no
tune to weak signals.

The fact that you can hear a station does not mean any local listeners will
tune to it. That is because what may be easy for you to tune, and of
acceptable strength, is not for nearly everyone else. Whether it is New York
or Florida or Texas or Puerto Rico, carefully tabulated diary returns show
where listening takes place, and it is almost entirely inside the named
contours.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

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

"Steve" wrote in message
...
On Jan 8, 12:09 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:

Funny how not one station in the market has made an FCC complaint,
listening
levels have not changed, and nobody else has mentioned this.

Plenty of people are talking about it. Perhaps the problem is that no
one is listening.

Describe a couple of these supposedly plentiful cases of NYC stations
being
interferred with inside their interference free contours.

You can't because there are no cases.

The mere fact that the ratings, which came out 15 minutes ago, show no
changes in listening levels in the NY market, disproves your point.

This reminds me the argument we had where you posted that I had to be
lying about the signal strength of stations I was receiving on AMBCB.

You ever make it up this way with a portable radio?

Again, simply: Inside the 10 mv/m contour for AM and the 64 dbu contour for
FM is where about 95% of all listening takes place, irrespective of whether
the areas beyond the contour are highly populated or rural. Listeners do no
tune to weak signals.

And again I'm not talking about weak signals. Strong signals that are
picked up with no background noise on a PORTABLE RADIO with its INTERNAL
antenna. The table top radios were just used as a reference because it
has a signal strength meter.

The fact that you can hear a station does not mean any local listeners will
tune to it. That is because what may be easy for you to tune, and of
acceptable strength, is not for nearly everyone else. Whether it is New York
or Florida or Texas or Puerto Rico, carefully tabulated diary returns show
where listening takes place, and it is almost entirely inside the named
contours.

I don't much time listening to weak signals. I don't care for putting up
with noise.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

And again I'm not talking about weak signals. Strong signals that are
picked up with no background noise on a PORTABLE RADIO with its INTERNAL
antenna. The table top radios were just used as a reference because it
has a signal strength meter.

The fact is that they may seem strong to you, but they are not considered
listenable by nearly everyone else or there would be vastly more listening
nationally outside the named contours and there is not.

The fact that you can hear a station does not mean any local listeners
will
tune to it. That is because what may be easy for you to tune, and of
acceptable strength, is not for nearly everyone else. Whether it is New
York
or Florida or Texas or Puerto Rico, carefully tabulated diary returns
show
where listening takes place, and it is almost entirely inside the named
contours.

I don't much time listening to weak signals. I don't care for putting up
with noise.

Yep, that is what the listeners say via their behaviour... signals below the
strength I mentioned are more subject to noise, harder to tune, etc. So they
don't listen.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios willsave it!
 

On Jan 8, 10:46*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

...



No, I signed some documents with my lawyers, and they filed them within
hours. A socialist government could not go against a worker's cooperative,
a
day old or a century old. I lost the stations, but not to the government..
I
still grin when I imagine the faces of the military junta guys when they
realized they had a Catch 22 on their hands.

The government went against the cooperative. So much for that story.

Nope, not so. Cooperative operated 590 and 810 for about 30 years.
Foolishly, they abandoned the FM simulcast licenses and when AM started to
die in the larger cities of Ecuador, the stations went silent.

It was merely called the "cooperative". It was the government.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

"Steve" wrote in message
...
On Jan 8, 10:46 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

...



No, I signed some documents with my lawyers, and they filed them within
hours. A socialist government could not go against a worker's
cooperative,
a
day old or a century old. I lost the stations, but not to the
government.
I
still grin when I imagine the faces of the military junta guys when they
realized they had a Catch 22 on their hands.

The government went against the cooperative. So much for that story.

Nope, not so. Cooperative operated 590 and 810 for about 30 years.
Foolishly, they abandoned the FM simulcast licenses and when AM started to
die in the larger cities of Ecuador, the stations went silent.

It was merely called the "cooperative". It was the government.

It was cooperative president Ulpiano Orozco. Write the Ecuadorian
Association of Broadcasters and ask.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios willsave it!
 

On Jan 8, 11:25*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in message

....



And again I'm not talking about weak signals. Strong signals that are
picked up with no background noise on a PORTABLE RADIO with its INTERNAL
antenna. The table top radios were just used as a reference because it
has a signal strength meter.

The fact is that they may seem strong to you, *but they are not considered
listenable by nearly everyone else or there would be vastly more listening
nationally outside the named contours and there is not.



The fact that you can hear a station does not mean any local listeners
will
tune to it. That is because what may be easy for you to tune, and of
acceptable strength, is not for nearly everyone else. Whether it is New
York
or Florida or Texas or Puerto Rico, carefully tabulated diary returns
show
where listening takes place, and it is almost entirely inside the named
contours.

I don't much time listening to weak signals. I don't care for putting up
with noise.

Yep, that is what the listeners say via their behaviour... signals below the
strength I mentioned are more subject to noise, harder to tune, etc. So they
don't listen.

And you think you can solve all these problems with your colloidal
silver?

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
The fact is that they may seem strong to you, but they are not
considered
listenable by nearly everyone else or there would be vastly more
listening
nationally outside the named contours and there is not.

The signals are strong. Anyone but you would agree that they are strong
signals except for you.

They are not strong enough based on the field strength and the criteria that
millions of diarykeepers for the ratings have shown us. It does not matter
what you think. What matters is whether local listeners use those signals,
and they do not.


Yep, that is what the listeners say via their behaviour... signals below
the
strength I mentioned are more subject to noise, harder to tune, etc. So
they
don't listen.

No I disagree. It must be content not the ability to get a noise free
signal. So it looks like you never made it up here.

There is considerable workplace listening to LA stations by commuters who
live in Ventura county and work closer to the LA stations. The fact that
they listen where the signal is stronger and not where it is not pretty
conclusively shows that what you consider a "strong" signal is not.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
The fact is that they may seem strong to you, but they are not
considered listenable by nearly everyone else or there would be
vastly more listening nationally outside the named contours and
there is not.

The signals are strong. Anyone but you would agree that they are
strong signals except for you.

They are not strong enough based on the field strength and the
criteria that millions of diarykeepers for the ratings have shown us.
It does not matter what you think. What matters is whether local
listeners use those signals, and they do not.

The way I look at it is that is does not matter what you think. Your
data or thinking is flawed.


Yep, that is what the listeners say via their behaviour... signals
below the strength I mentioned are more subject to noise, harder
to tune, etc. So they don't listen.

No I disagree. It must be content not the ability to get a noise
free signal. So it looks like you never made it up here.

There is considerable workplace listening to LA stations by commuters
who live in Ventura county and work closer to the LA stations. The
fact that they listen where the signal is stronger and not where it
is not pretty conclusively shows that what you consider a "strong"
signal is not.

Yeah, I live and work in Ventura and I listen to those LA stations so I
know and you continue to speculate. I don't listen in the workplace
because it is not appropriate. I do listen at home in the car and in
parks with a portable radio.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radioswill save it!
 

Yep, that is what the listeners say via their behaviour... signals below the
strength I mentioned are more subject to noise, harder to tune, etc. So they
don't listen.


No I disagree. It must be content not the ability to get a noise free
signal. So it looks like you never made it up here.

Of course they listen to whatever station has the content they want but
it must also have a good signal. If either criteria is lacking, they
find another outlet or give up. That's the behavior of the vast majority
of AM listeners. They are the ones that create the ratings which are
reflected in the diaries. The fact that MW Dx'ers don't like this
reality, including myself, is unfortunately irrelevant.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radioswill save it!
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...



Didn't you say in the past that after going back to the US and/or Puerto
Rico
(after getting tossed) that you were still trying to sell your stations in
Ecuador?

No, I said that in '69, thinking I could sell, I worked briefly with Art
Keller as a manager at EZ Communications and had a deal to buy 25% for $100
k, but when I got back to Ecuador things were so bad that foreign currency
transactions were frozen and I could not do any deal. About then, I put the
talk AM on and made the mistake of speaking out against the government.

They did have airplanes back then, and I could come and go.

Now, in one rapid 24 hour period, you are telling us that you
*transferred* it
all to some employee cooperative, before you got tossed?

Did you do that at gunpoint as well?

No, I signed some documents with my lawyers, and they filed them within
hours. A socialist government could not go against a worker's cooperative, a
day old or a century old. I lost the stations, but not to the government. I
still grin when I imagine the faces of the military junta guys when they
realized they had a Catch 22 on their hands.

What an interesting tale.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios willsave it!
 

On Jan 8, 11:51*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

...
On Jan 8, 10:46 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:





"Steve" wrote in message

...

No, I signed some documents with my lawyers, and they filed them within
hours. A socialist government could not go against a worker's
cooperative,
a
day old or a century old. I lost the stations, but not to the
government.
I
still grin when I imagine the faces of the military junta guys when they
realized they had a Catch 22 on their hands.

The government went against the cooperative. So much for that story.

Nope, not so. Cooperative operated 590 and 810 for about 30 years.
Foolishly, they abandoned the FM simulcast licenses and when AM started to
die in the larger cities of Ecuador, the stations went silent.

It was merely called the "cooperative". It was the government.

It was cooperative president Ulpiano Orozco. Write the Ecuadorian
Association of Broadcasters and ask.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I did.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios willsave it!
 

On Jan 8, 11:56*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

...

And you think you can solve all these problems with your colloidal
silver?

You really need to work on some new material

Why don't you tell me about the totally non-existent HD interference to WADO
and WCAA again. That was rather amusing.

You amuse very easily in that case.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radioswill save it!
 

D Peter Maus wrote:

Yes, I did make a point. Whether you left voluntarily, or you were
removed at gun point, is a semantic matter-- the point is that you did
not stay and fight.

Just asking as a disinterested observer, how could one " *stay* and
fight" if they were " *removed* at gunpoint"? It seems it would be
difficult to stay when you have been removed, does it not?

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radioswill save it!
 

dxAce wrote:


It all makes for an interesting story, with little or no paper trail.


As a disinterested observer and without taking sides in this Great
Debate, just how much 'paper trail' should be expected from something that:

a) happened around -40- years ago
b) in a foreign country
c) and occurred during a turbulent government take-over

Do you speak/read Spanish?

Do you have access to the 40 year old foreign newspapers? If so, have
you researched them?

No?

Well then, how do you know there -isn't- a 'paper trail'?

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radioswillsave it!
 

Billy Burpelson wrote:

D Peter Maus wrote:

Yes, I did make a point. Whether you left voluntarily, or you were
removed at gun point, is a semantic matter-- the point is that you did
not stay and fight.

Just asking as a disinterested observer, how could one " *stay* and
fight" if they were " *removed* at gunpoint"? It seems it would be
difficult to stay when you have been removed, does it not?

How does one get confronted *at gunpoint*, then is conveniently released to go
about his/her business for 24 hours pulling a *Catch 22* on some f00kin hunta,
then is picked up later on to be brought to the airport *at gunpoint*?

Lots of questions.

If of course it were all real.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radioswill save it!
 

Billy Burpelson wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:

Yes, I did make a point. Whether you left voluntarily, or you were
removed at gun point, is a semantic matter-- the point is that you did
not stay and fight.

Just asking as a disinterested observer, how could one " *stay* and
fight" if they were " *removed* at gunpoint"? It seems it would be
difficult to stay when you have been removed, does it not?


Similarly, it's difficult to be defender of democracy, risking life
and property, when one has been removed, does it not?

Which was my point.

If one insists on claiming rights to risk of life and limb, as keeper
of the flame, one must remain in order both keep the flame and face the
risk.

The issue is not whether he left or was removed. The issue is
whether, by not being there, he can't claim great risk as defender of
democracy.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radioswillsave it!
 

Billy Burpelson wrote:

dxAce wrote:

It all makes for an interesting story, with little or no paper trail.

As a disinterested observer and without taking sides in this Great
Debate, just how much 'paper trail' should be expected from something that:

a) happened around -40- years ago
b) in a foreign country
c) and occurred during a turbulent government take-over

Do you speak/read Spanish?

Do you have access to the 40 year old foreign newspapers? If so, have
you researched them?

No?

Well then, how do you know there -isn't- a 'paper trail'?

Because I long ago discovered that David 'Eduardo' was a pathological liar.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
They are not strong enough based on the field strength and the
criteria that millions of diarykeepers for the ratings have shown us.
It does not matter what you think. What matters is whether local
listeners use those signals, and they do not.

The way I look at it is that is does not matter what you think. Your
data or thinking is flawed.

The data is not flawed. In fact, a number of reserchers as well as Arbitron
itself have done studies to determine the concentration of listenership in
areas of different signal strenght. I participated with Arbitron and
DataWorld in an overlay study of singnal contours vs. diary returns with
follow up personal contact with diarykeepers to determine the ascription of
listening entries in areas of a market served by many overlapping
simulcasts. The premise of 95% of listening in the 64 dbu FM countour and in
the 10 mV/m for AM was confirmed, and is the standard for that market which
has over a dozen simulcast operations in it.


There is considerable workplace listening to LA stations by commuters
who live in Ventura county and work closer to the LA stations. The
fact that they listen where the signal is stronger and not where it
is not pretty conclusively shows that what you consider a "strong"
signal is not.

Yeah, I live and work in Ventura and I listen to those LA stations so I
know and you continue to speculate. I don't listen in the workplace
because it is not appropriate. I do listen at home in the car and in
parks with a portable radio.

You are one of very few. In fact, ZIP code and diary analysis shows that
listening to LA stations by residents of Ventura County occurs either while
working in LA County or in areas where signal intensities are adequate. For
AM, that mostly means within a mile or two of the coast; farther inland
there is nearly no listening save to KFI.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...



Didn't you say in the past that after going back to the US and/or
Puerto
Rico
(after getting tossed) that you were still trying to sell your stations
in
Ecuador?

No, I said that in '69, thinking I could sell, I worked briefly with Art
Keller as a manager at EZ Communications and had a deal to buy 25% for
$100
k, but when I got back to Ecuador things were so bad that foreign
currency
transactions were frozen and I could not do any deal. About then, I put
the
talk AM on and made the mistake of speaking out against the government.

They did have airplanes back then, and I could come and go.

Now, in one rapid 24 hour period, you are telling us that you
*transferred* it
all to some employee cooperative, before you got tossed?

Did you do that at gunpoint as well?

No, I signed some documents with my lawyers, and they filed them within
hours. A socialist government could not go against a worker's
cooperative, a
day old or a century old. I lost the stations, but not to the government.
I
still grin when I imagine the faces of the military junta guys when they
realized they had a Catch 22 on their hands.

What an interesting tale.

And totally verifiable if you care to check. Just ask the AER (ecuadorian
Association of Broadcasters) and they will tell you of the cooperative which
operated for about 30 years or so.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

"Steve" wrote in message
...
On Jan 8, 11:51 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

...
On Jan 8, 10:46 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:





"Steve" wrote in message

...

No, I signed some documents with my lawyers, and they filed them
within
hours. A socialist government could not go against a worker's
cooperative,
a
day old or a century old. I lost the stations, but not to the
government.
I
still grin when I imagine the faces of the military junta guys when
they
realized they had a Catch 22 on their hands.

The government went against the cooperative. So much for that story.

Nope, not so. Cooperative operated 590 and 810 for about 30 years.
Foolishly, they abandoned the FM simulcast licenses and when AM started
to
die in the larger cities of Ecuador, the stations went silent.

It was merely called the "cooperative". It was the government.

It was cooperative president Ulpiano Orozco. Write the Ecuadorian
Association of Broadcasters and ask.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I did.

I doubt it. Considering they don't have an office, just a mailing address,
there is no way you could have an answer so soon.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

"Steve" wrote in message
...
On Jan 8, 11:56 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

...

And you think you can solve all these problems with your colloidal
silver?

You really need to work on some new material

Why don't you tell me about the totally non-existent HD interference to
WADO
and WCAA again. That was rather amusing.

You amuse very easily in that case.

There is no interference inside the protected contours of any NY station. An
FM is worth $150 to $300 million, and an AM from about $20 million to
perhaps $175 million, and no owner is going to let any portion of the
protected contour be subject to interference.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...

I did.

Ya know, it would really seem as though there would have been better
remedies out
there to ensure the preservation of his investment.


Again, you are judging by US standards the things that go on in nations that
do not have, or for a period, do not have rule of law. A government like
that can nationalize anything they want.

In Cuba, American mining, refining, hotel and package goods companies had
all their assets nationalized in 1960. None have been recovered.

In Mexico, Lázaro Cárdenas nationalized foreign oil, rail and mining
companies in the early 30's. None of these assets has been recovered to this
day, over 70 years later.

And look at Bolivia's nationalization of the tin mines. Or Ecuador's
nationalization of petroleum resources. The list is endless. And there has
been no recovery. Venezuela has just nationalized the majority share of the
petroleum industry. Several US companies did not want to work with the
government, and abandoned their remaining interest and received nothing.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

"Steve" wrote in message
...
This is a particularly lame part of your story, Cornholio. How hard
would it be for the govt to claim that it had to intervene due to
financial wrongdoing within the cooperative--or for one of a thousand
other convenient reasons? Trumping up these kinds of excuses is second
nature to small, conniving minds, as you know perhaps better than
anyone. Juntas aren't typically sticklers for due process. You just
weren't in much of a position to see all of this, being on your knees
most of the time.

As I said, and you did not read, the Ecuadorian junta was modeled after the
Peruvian one commanded by Gral. Velasco. It was not a rightist military
movement, but of the extreme left. The whole idea of giving the stations
away before they were nationalized was that a leftist "peoples" government
would never, ever, in Latin America, do anything against a union,
cooperative or leftist organization. Such a move would have caused the
entire labor, farm workers and cooperative movements to have risen in
protest. And that was why I did it.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
D Peter Maus wrote:

Yes, I did make a point. Whether you left voluntarily, or you were
removed at gun point, is a semantic matter-- the point is that you did
not stay and fight.

Just asking as a disinterested observer, how could one " *stay* and fight"
if they were " *removed* at gunpoint"? It seems it would be difficult to
stay when you have been removed, does it not?

And, more to the point, there was no "fight." There was opposition in the
press and the political parties, but much of that was silenced by a good
beating, a convenient disappearance or imprisonment.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios willsave it!
 

On Jan 9, 8:08*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message

...







David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...

Didn't you say in the past that after going back to the US and/or
Puerto
Rico
(after getting tossed) that you were still trying to sell your stations
in
Ecuador?

No, I said that in '69, thinking I could sell, I worked briefly with Art
Keller as a manager at EZ Communications and had a deal to buy 25% for
$100
k, but when I got back to Ecuador things were so bad that foreign
currency
transactions were frozen and I could not do any deal. About then, I put
the
talk AM on and made the mistake of speaking out against the government.

They did have airplanes back then, and I could come and go.

Now, in one rapid 24 hour period, you are telling us that you
*transferred* it
all to some employee cooperative, before you got tossed?

Did you do that at gunpoint as well?

No, I signed some documents with my lawyers, and they filed them within
hours. A socialist government could not go against a worker's
cooperative, a
day old or a century old. I lost the stations, but not to the government.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios willsave it!
 

On Jan 9, 8:20*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message

...

D Peter Maus wrote:

* Yes, I did make a point. Whether you left voluntarily, or you were
removed at gun point, is a semantic matter-- the point is that you did
not stay and fight.

Just asking as a disinterested observer, how could one " *stay* and fight"
if they were " *removed* at gunpoint"? It seems it would be difficult to
stay when you have been removed, does it not?

And, more to the point, there was no "fight."

Yeah, because you didn't start one. You were too busy exercising your
tonsils on the Junta bosses.

There was opposition in the
press and the political parties, but much of that was silenced by a good
beating, a convenient disappearance or imprisonment.

All of which you conveniently escaped, probably because you were an
informer.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radioswill save it!
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Billy Burpelson wrote:

dxAce wrote:

It all makes for an interesting story, with little or no paper trail.

As a disinterested observer and without taking sides in this Great
Debate, just how much 'paper trail' should be expected from something
that:

a) happened around -40- years ago
b) in a foreign country
c) and occurred during a turbulent government take-over

Do you speak/read Spanish?

Do you have access to the 40 year old foreign newspapers? If so, have
you researched them?

No?

Well then, how do you know there -isn't- a 'paper trail'?

Because I long ago discovered that David 'Eduardo' was a pathological
liar.

With absolutely no proof.

What you have done is trumped up insignificant issues and used them to
support your claim. For example, the NAB's error of incorrectly printing my
title in the program for a convention seminar was seen by you to be evidence
of lying about my title. Despite demonstrating to you how the error occured
and how the title, in fact, did not exist, you laid claim to your belief
that there was some kind of chicanery or deceipt involved.

Even more amusing was the insistence that I could not have editied my high
school´s paper since I was but a Sophomore when I became editior... yet the
totally verifiable fact that in that year, there was no Junior or Senior
class fell on your deaf ears. My class was the first to "extend" the school
from 1st to 9th grade to 1st to 12th grade, meaning that for that first
year, the "High School" had only one grade. You could verify that with an
e-mail, but didn't. You preferred to trump that realtive triviality into a
case to demonstrate your claim I had lied... which is not so.

And on and on with the same sort of thing, none of which proved anything.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radioswillsave it!
 

On Jan 9, 8:23*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message

...







Billy Burpelson wrote:

D Peter Maus wrote:

* Yes, I did make a point. Whether you left voluntarily, or you were
removed at gun point, is a semantic matter-- the point is that you did
not stay and fight.

Just asking as a disinterested observer, how could one " *stay* and
fight" if they were " *removed* at gunpoint"? It seems it would be
difficult to stay when you have been removed, does it not?

How does one get confronted *at gunpoint*, then is conveniently released
to go
about his/her business for 24 hours pulling a *Catch 22* on some f00kin
hunta,
then is picked up later on to be brought to the airport *at gunpoint*?

I was confronted and told I had to leave; as I have said for the period up
to the next flight, I was escorted by my new buddies with rifles. As I also
said, my colleague at El Tiempo was disappeared, the producer of a major TV
station imprisoned (he escaped with the help of a tractor), etc., etc. A
month or so after I left, the son of Quito's largest department store, Jaime
Briz, my neighbor, was kidnapped... his head was thrown into the family's
patio a few days later. Those were not nice times.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You got out alive by informing on others, who quite likely did not
survive, by bribing officials and by doing "favors". You aren't
fooling anyone.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios willsave it!
 

On Jan 9, 8:24*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in ...

Billy Burpelson wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:

* Yes, I did make a point. Whether you left voluntarily, or you were
removed at gun point, is a semantic matter-- the point is that you did
not stay and fight.

* The issue is not whether he left or was removed. The issue is whether,
by not being there, he can't claim great risk as defender of democracy.

I took the risk by speaking out while there. The effect of doing so was the
loss of everything I had, including the right to live where I wanted to
live.

I don't think being a stool pigeon counts as "speaking out", Tardo.
Even though the effect of doing so was getting out alive.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radioswill save it!
 

"Steve" wrote in message
...

You got out alive by informing on others, who quite likely did not
survive, by bribing officials and by doing "favors". You aren't
fooling anyone.
}
That is funnier than your usual crazed stuff about all NYC radio stations
being interfered with (men in black, anyone?)

How could one who was in opposition to the government inform on anyone?
Since the "opposition" was printed every day in the paper and broadcast on
radio and TV, there were no secrets as to who was in the opposition and thus
nobody to inform on.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radioswillsave it!
 

On Jan 9, 8:30*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message

...







Billy Burpelson wrote:

dxAce wrote:

It all makes for an interesting story, with little or no paper trail.

As a disinterested observer and without taking sides in this Great
Debate, just how much 'paper trail' should be expected from something
that:

a) happened around -40- years ago
b) in a foreign country
c) and occurred during a turbulent government take-over

Do you speak/read Spanish?

Do you have access to the 40 year old foreign newspapers? If so, have
you researched them?

No?

Well then, how do you know there -isn't- a 'paper trail'?

Because I long ago discovered that David 'Eduardo' was a pathological
liar.

With absolutely no proof.

What you have done is trumped up insignificant issues and used them to
support your claim. For example, the NAB's error of incorrectly printing my
title in the program for a convention seminar was seen by you to be evidence
of lying about my title. Despite demonstrating to you how the error occured
and how the title, in fact, did not exist, you laid claim to your belief
that there was some kind of chicanery or deceipt involved.

Even more amusing was the insistence that I could not have editied my high
school´s paper since I was but a Sophomore when I became editior... yet the
totally verifiable fact that in that year, there was no Junior or Senior
class fell on your deaf ears. My class was the first to "extend" the school
from 1st to 9th grade to 1st to 12th grade, meaning that for that first
year, the "High School" had only one grade. You could verify that with an
e-mail, but didn't. You preferred to trump that realtive triviality into a
case to demonstrate your claim I had lied... which is not so.

And on and on with the same sort of thing, none of which proved anything.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Lol. Face it Tardo, you were caught in your lies. I know being caught
was traumatic for you, but look on the bright side: no one else has
given it much thought since it happened. The only person worked up
into a lather is you.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
They are not strong enough based on the field strength and the
criteria that millions of diarykeepers for the ratings have shown us.
It does not matter what you think. What matters is whether local
listeners use those signals, and they do not.

The way I look at it is that is does not matter what you think. Your
data or thinking is flawed.

The data is not flawed. In fact, a number of reserchers as well as Arbitron
itself have done studies to determine the concentration of listenership in
areas of different signal strenght. I participated with Arbitron and
DataWorld in an overlay study of singnal contours vs. diary returns with
follow up personal contact with diarykeepers to determine the ascription of
listening entries in areas of a market served by many overlapping
simulcasts. The premise of 95% of listening in the 64 dbu FM countour and in
the 10 mV/m for AM was confirmed, and is the standard for that market which
has over a dozen simulcast operations in it.

I understand the theory as its pretty straight forward and simple.

So you have a plausible theory and some empirical data that appears to
validate it but something has gone wrong. Might be a problem with the
data collection process.


There is considerable workplace listening to LA stations by commuters
who live in Ventura county and work closer to the LA stations. The
fact that they listen where the signal is stronger and not where it
is not pretty conclusively shows that what you consider a "strong"
signal is not.

Yeah, I live and work in Ventura and I listen to those LA stations so I
know and you continue to speculate. I don't listen in the workplace
because it is not appropriate. I do listen at home in the car and in
parks with a portable radio.

You are one of very few. In fact, ZIP code and diary analysis shows that
listening to LA stations by residents of Ventura County occurs either while
working in LA County or in areas where signal intensities are adequate. For
AM, that mostly means within a mile or two of the coast; farther inland
there is nearly no listening save to KFI.

So I live in an area that is anomalous to what might be described as a
general rule.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radios will save it!
 

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

So I live in an area that is anomalous to what might be described as a
general rule.


No, the anomaly is in the way you listen to radio.

Yea Eadurdo, radio is a growth-industry and crappy HD radioswillsave it!
 

On Jan 9, 8:51*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

...

You got out alive by informing on others, who quite likely did not
survive, by bribing officials and by doing "favors". You aren't
fooling anyone.}

That is funnier than your usual crazed stuff about all NYC radio stations
being interfered with (men in black, anyone?)

Is that the color of the month at iNiquity?


How could one who was in opposition to the government inform on anyone?

By informing on others who were truly in opposition to the government.
By informing on others in order to save your own hide. Next question.

Since the "opposition" was printed every day in the paper and broadcast on
radio and TV, there were no secrets as to who was in the opposition and thus
nobody to inform on.

Or at any rate, there were no secrets for the junta bosses you
reported do. But there were secrets for the people you were informing
on.