"Natterings of a naysayer"

"The vast majority of the stations employing HD technology exist in
the class of the largest broadcasters that are heavily invested in the
brand with a direct ownership stake in the inventor and capital
investment in the equipment. The majority of mid to small stations are
forever frozen out of participation due to the capital cost and
ongoing licensing fees that represent additional expense in a time
when it is difficult to pay the FICA tax or light bill, others taking
a wait and see attitude. Absences of HD in these geographic regions
present a discontinuity of coverage and setback for receiver sales. I
contend the large groups are committed but only to a degree as most
(if not all) have not yet stuck their neck out far enough to invest in
back-up or redundant HD transmission systems. Some of the equipment is
now into its second if not already third generation, all in a very
short period of existence."

"The 10db power increase that's being talked about for FM may help the
digital but will have a negative impact on the analog, which is
currently paying ALL the bills. As an example, even a well-integrated
92 and/or 67 kHz relatively narrow-band subcarriers can wreak
multipath havoc with an FM signal in some markets. The sheer capital
cost of the power increase (if approved) will be staggering
considering most of the current hardware and ancillary equipment will
have to be replaced."

"Where robust in reach, radio is an ailing medium that is undergoing
yet another adjustment to bring expenses inline with revised revenue;
so another big outlay in capital is not likely. Many station staff
level people look on HD as something that was added to their task list
with no operational funding and dwindling resources. Sales people are
concerned that additional channels may compete for revenue they have
running on other stations even in their own cluster."

Watt Hairston, Chief Engineer, WSM

http://tinyurl.com/27f96k

"IBOCcrock" wrote in message
...
.. The sheer capital
cost of the power increase (if approved) will be staggering
considering most of the current hardware and ancillary equipment will
have to be replaced."

"Where robust in reach, radio is an ailing medium that is undergoing
yet another adjustment to bring expenses inline with revised revenue;
so another big outlay in capital is not likely.

Of all the former 1 A clear channels, WSM is the lowest in billing and the
lowest in market rank. It exists only as a promotion for the Gaylord
enterprises in Nashville, as its ratings place it 14th in the market, and in
billings it is 22nd per a reputable source. For most viable stations in the
top 100 markets, the cost of upgrading to new HD gear is small, and is a
depreciable capital expense item, not a cost. Dogs like WSM will find it
hard to manage, but that is because they are not successful radio stations.

On Feb 15, 3:15�pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"IBOCcrock" wrote in message

...
. The sheer capital

cost of the power increase (if approved) will be staggering
considering most of the current hardware and ancillary equipment will
have to be replaced."

"Where robust in reach, radio is an ailing medium that is undergoing
yet another adjustment to bring expenses inline with revised revenue;
so another big outlay in capital is not likely.

Of all the former 1 A clear channels, WSM is the lowest in billing and the
lowest in market rank. It exists only as a promotion for the Gaylord
enterprises in Nashville, as its ratings place it 14th in the market, and in
billings it is 22nd per a reputable source. For most viable stations in the
top 100 markets, the cost of upgrading to new HD gear is small, and is a
depreciable capital expense item, not a cost. Dogs like WSM will find it
hard to manage, but that is because they are not successful radio stations..

Costs to upgrade run from $100,000 to $600,000 - not small. Plus, the
on-going licensing and HD channel royalty fees. Plus, the new 10db
power increase, if approved, will be staggering, as most equipment
will need replacing. Plus, each new release of hardware upgrade is an
on-going expense, with no return. Nice try! The same applies to those
empty HD radios that aren't selling.

"IBOCcrock" wrote in message
...
On Feb 15, 3:15?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"IBOCcrock" wrote in message

...
. The sheer capital

cost of the power increase (if approved) will be staggering
considering most of the current hardware and ancillary equipment will
have to be replaced."

"Where robust in reach, radio is an ailing medium that is undergoing
yet another adjustment to bring expenses inline with revised revenue;
so another big outlay in capital is not likely.

Of all the former 1 A clear channels, WSM is the lowest in billing and the
lowest in market rank. It exists only as a promotion for the Gaylord
enterprises in Nashville, as its ratings place it 14th in the market, and
in
billings it is 22nd per a reputable source. For most viable stations in
the
top 100 markets, the cost of upgrading to new HD gear is small, and is a
depreciable capital expense item, not a cost. Dogs like WSM will find it
hard to manage, but that is because they are not successful radio
stations.

Costs to upgrade run from $100,000 to $600,000 - not small.

For a non directional, single tower operation, the costs are at the very low
end.

Plus, the
on-going licensing and HD channel royalty fees.

There is on annual fee for an AM.

Plus, the new 10db
power increase, if approved, will be staggering, as most equipment
will need replacing.

That is for FM. And the costs are relatively minor... many existing FM HD
transmitters can increase power with module increases. "Most" is an absurd
word to use. Generally, only the PA part of the HD transmitter will be
replaced... the rest of most systems are robust enough, as they handle the
analog power which is much greater.

On Feb 15, 5:58�pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"IBOCcrock" wrote in message

...
On Feb 15, 3:15?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:





"IBOCcrock" wrote in message

...
. The sheer capital

cost of the power increase (if approved) will be staggering
considering most of the current hardware and ancillary equipment will
have to be replaced."

"Where robust in reach, radio is an ailing medium that is undergoing
yet another adjustment to bring expenses inline with revised revenue;
so another big outlay in capital is not likely.

Of all the former 1 A clear channels, WSM is the lowest in billing and the
lowest in market rank. It exists only as a promotion for the Gaylord
enterprises in Nashville, as its ratings place it 14th in the market, and
in
billings it is 22nd per a reputable source. For most viable stations in
the
top 100 markets, the cost of upgrading to new HD gear is small, and is a
depreciable capital expense item, not a cost. Dogs like WSM will find it
hard to manage, but that is because they are not successful radio
stations.

Costs to upgrade run from $100,000 to $600,000 - not small.

For a non directional, single tower operation, the costs are at the very low
end.

Plus, the
on-going licensing and HD channel royalty fees.

There is on annual fee for an AM.

Plus, the new 10db
power increase, if approved, will be staggering, as most equipment
will need replacing.

That is for FM. And the costs are relatively minor... many existing FM HD
transmitters can increase power with module increases. "Most" is an absurd
word to use. Generally, only the PA part of the HD transmitter will be
replaced... the rest of most systems are robust enough, as they handle the
analog power which is much greater.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Not minor, when all of the major broadcasters stocks are down 90% -
for AM, the costs are even greater!

On Feb 15, 8:50*pm, dave wrote:
IBOCcrock wrote:
Costs to upgrade run from $100,000 to $600,000 - not small. Plus, the
on-going licensing and HD channel royalty fees. Plus, the new 10db
power increase, if approved, will be staggering, as most equipment
will need replacing. Plus, each new release of hardware upgrade is an
on-going expense, with no return. Nice try! The same applies to those
empty HD radios that aren't selling.

- Don't forget that the NIMBYs will go nuts when they hear
- all the radio stations are going up 10 times in power.

Lets see an Analog AM or FM Radio Station that has
100% of it's Analog ERP as a Baseline.

Starts up the IBOC Digital Signal at 1% of the ERP for
the Analog ERP Baseline.

Now they would increase the IBOC Digital Signal from 1%
to 10% (10X) of the ERP for the Analog ERP Baseline.

What's The Problem : Seems to me that 10% is still
1/10th of 100% Analog ERP Baseline.

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"IBOCcrock" wrote in message
...
On Feb 15, 3:15?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"IBOCcrock" wrote in message

...
. The sheer capital

cost of the power increase (if approved) will be staggering
considering most of the current hardware and ancillary equipment
will have to be replaced."

"Where robust in reach, radio is an ailing medium that is
undergoing yet another adjustment to bring expenses inline with
revised revenue; so another big outlay in capital is not likely.

Of all the former 1 A clear channels, WSM is the lowest in billing
and the lowest in market rank. It exists only as a promotion for
the Gaylord enterprises in Nashville, as its ratings place it 14th
in the market, and in billings it is 22nd per a reputable source.
For most viable stations in the top 100 markets, the cost of
upgrading to new HD gear is small, and is a depreciable capital
expense item, not a cost. Dogs like WSM will find it hard to
manage, but that is because they are not successful radio stations.

Costs to upgrade run from $100,000 to $600,000 - not small.

For a non directional, single tower operation, the costs are at the
very low end.

Plus, the on-going licensing and HD channel royalty fees.

There is on annual fee for an AM.

Plus, the new 10db power increase, if approved, will be
staggering, as most equipment will need replacing.

That is for FM. And the costs are relatively minor... many existing
FM HD transmitters can increase power with module increases. "Most"
is an absurd word to use. Generally, only the PA part of the HD
transmitter will be replaced... the rest of most systems are robust
enough, as they handle the analog power which is much greater.

If you understand it explain to the audience peak power relative to RMS
and how they relate in terms of transmitter capacity needed for a
digital signal verses analog.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"IBOCcrock" wrote in message
...
On Feb 15, 3:15?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"IBOCcrock" wrote in message

...
. The sheer capital

cost of the power increase (if approved) will be staggering
considering most of the current hardware and ancillary equipment
will have to be replaced."
"Where robust in reach, radio is an ailing medium that is
undergoing yet another adjustment to bring expenses inline with
revised revenue; so another big outlay in capital is not likely.
Of all the former 1 A clear channels, WSM is the lowest in billing
and the lowest in market rank. It exists only as a promotion for
the Gaylord enterprises in Nashville, as its ratings place it 14th
in the market, and in billings it is 22nd per a reputable source.
For most viable stations in the top 100 markets, the cost of
upgrading to new HD gear is small, and is a depreciable capital
expense item, not a cost. Dogs like WSM will find it hard to
manage, but that is because they are not successful radio stations.
Costs to upgrade run from $100,000 to $600,000 - not small.

For a non directional, single tower operation, the costs are at the
very low end.

Plus, the on-going licensing and HD channel royalty fees.

There is on annual fee for an AM.

Plus, the new 10db power increase, if approved, will be
staggering, as most equipment will need replacing.

That is for FM. And the costs are relatively minor... many existing
FM HD transmitters can increase power with module increases. "Most"
is an absurd word to use. Generally, only the PA part of the HD
transmitter will be replaced... the rest of most systems are robust
enough, as they handle the analog power which is much greater.

If you understand it explain to the audience peak power relative to RMS
and how they relate in terms of transmitter capacity needed for a
digital signal verses analog.

Throw in Figure of Merit just for laughs.

On Feb 15, 2:58*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"IBOCcrock" wrote in message

...
On Feb 15, 3:15?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:





"IBOCcrock" wrote in message

...
. The sheer capital

cost of the power increase (if approved) will be staggering
considering most of the current hardware and ancillary equipment will
have to be replaced."

"Where robust in reach, radio is an ailing medium that is undergoing
yet another adjustment to bring expenses inline with revised revenue;
so another big outlay in capital is not likely.

Of all the former 1 A clear channels, WSM is the lowest in billing and the
lowest in market rank. It exists only as a promotion for the Gaylord
enterprises in Nashville, as its ratings place it 14th in the market, and
in
billings it is 22nd per a reputable source. For most viable stations in
the
top 100 markets, the cost of upgrading to new HD gear is small, and is a
depreciable capital expense item, not a cost. Dogs like WSM will find it
hard to manage, but that is because they are not successful radio
stations.

Costs to upgrade run from $100,000 to $600,000 - not small.

For a non directional, single tower operation, the costs are at the very low
end.

Plus, the
on-going licensing and HD channel royalty fees.

There is on annual fee for an AM.

Plus, the new 10db
power increase, if approved, will be staggering, as most equipment
will need replacing.

That is for FM. And the costs are relatively minor... many existing FM HD
transmitters can increase power with module increases. "Most" is an absurd
word to use. Generally, only the PA part of the HD transmitter will be
replaced... the rest of most systems are robust enough, as they handle the
analog power which is much greater.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

d'Eduardo,

Since "HD" Radio starting with a low 1% of the Analog ERP :
Why would not the Radio Station's Chief Engineer or some
Corporate Media Type; have simply Bought an HD Transmitter
or Power Amp that would have been capable of at least 10%
of the Analog ERP. [ Dial-it-Up -or- Dial-it-Down ]

Knowing that over time {Years of Implementation} the Digital
"HD" Signal Power would be increasing to meet the needs
of the Radio Station's Listeners and to fill-in the Radio Station's
Signal to fully cover the Service Contour.

DOH ! - idtars ~ RHF