Big 89 Rewind
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
dxAce wrote:

Programming AFN is not like programming WKSC.

As past part of a comittee to get two AFRTS stations in Puerto Rico
closed
(they were) I find that statement disingenuous.

Why did you want them closed?

It was the PRBA that wanted them closed as they were delivering significant
signals to non-milatary areas in the San Juan and Aguadilla cities.

Wouldn't they let you pretend that you owned them?

They were crummy AMs.

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
dxAce wrote:

Programming AFN is not like programming WKSC.

As past part of a comittee to get two AFRTS stations in Puerto Rico
closed
(they were) I find that statement disingenuous.

Why did you want them closed?

It was the PRBA that wanted them closed as they were delivering significant
signals to non-milatary areas in the San Juan and Aguadilla cities.

Awwwww...



Wouldn't they let you pretend that you owned them?

They were crummy AMs.

So it was really because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned them...

Big 89 Rewind
 

dxAce wrote:

D Peter Maus wrote:

dxAce wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:

dxAce wrote:
David Eduardo wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
dxAce wrote:
He doesn't get it, Steve.

Consider that there are a number of things that are not like things at
home. One is that the listener him/herself is different.
They're
committed. They're focussed. They're trained. They've volunteered to
serve. They're politically active at the most basic level. They're less
concerned about the fluff that dominates the evening news than they are
defending the fundamental freedoms that permit the behaviours that lead to
the fluff that dominates the evening news.

That takes them off most squares of the psychographic grid. Hometown
demography doesn't apply. They're a different type of people with
listening tastes and habits that reflect a different type of lifestyle.

Another consideration is that there are dramatically fewer choices for
listening in theatre. Unlike you and me, who have a dial full of
selections, troops in theatre have a fraction of the offerings. They
listen, as you say, for fresh truths from home. Not for the latest George
Michael release.

And politically, they tend to a more conservative path. Rush is big with
military, as a whole, regardless of demography.

Programming AFN is not like programming WKSC.
As past part of a comittee to get two AFRTS stations in Puerto Rico closed
(they were) I find that statement disingenuous.
Why did you want them closed?

Wouldn't they let you pretend that you owned them?


There's a lot of anti-military in this country. I live about 5
minutes from Great Lakes. It's shameful the way men and women in uniform
are treated in public, here.

I was behind a woman at Wal-Mart in Waukegan about 3 months ago. She
was clearly stocking up, and was burning up some serious time in the
checkout line. The guy behind me was grousing about it.

I noticed her ID on a lanyard around her neck. And asked if she was
Navy. She affirmed she was, and I thanked her for her service. You
should have heard the noise. From others in line. From others in
adjacent lines. The cashier had the good sense to be quiet, but was
clearly disamused.

The pride with which Gleason asserts his part in getting two AFRTS
stations closed only underscores the assertion sometime back that the
only thing we've ever heard him renounce is his citizenship.
Amen to that.

We've a ships reunion next year at or near Great Lakes, so perhaps I'll get down
that way.


Do.

I certainly hope to do so. Been 30 years or more since I saw a lot of those guys.




That's going to be an emotional weekend.

Big 89 Rewind
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
... The pride
with which Gleason asserts his part in getting two AFRTS
stations closed only underscores the assertion sometime back that the only
thing we've ever heard him renounce is his citizenship.


The driving force in closing AFRTS Ramey and AFRTS Buchanan was the PRBA
which objected, on legal grounds, to those stations covering way too much of
the civilian population when an LPFM would suffice. Considering that, at the
time, the environmental damage and health risk the Navy was putting the
Municipality of Vieques through at the time, the PRBA was rather adamant
about this invasion of Puerto Rican airwaves by the US military.

Big 89 Rewind
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


So it was really because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...



No, it was because the 120 station strong Puerto Rico Broadcasters
Association felt the stations were illegal. And they were.

Big 89 Rewind
 

D Peter Maus wrote:

dxAce wrote:

D Peter Maus wrote:

dxAce wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:

dxAce wrote:
David Eduardo wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
dxAce wrote:
He doesn't get it, Steve.

Consider that there are a number of things that are not like things at
home. One is that the listener him/herself is different.
They're
committed. They're focussed. They're trained. They've volunteered to
serve. They're politically active at the most basic level. They're less
concerned about the fluff that dominates the evening news than they are
defending the fundamental freedoms that permit the behaviours that lead to
the fluff that dominates the evening news.

That takes them off most squares of the psychographic grid. Hometown
demography doesn't apply. They're a different type of people with
listening tastes and habits that reflect a different type of lifestyle.

Another consideration is that there are dramatically fewer choices for
listening in theatre. Unlike you and me, who have a dial full of
selections, troops in theatre have a fraction of the offerings. They
listen, as you say, for fresh truths from home. Not for the latest George
Michael release.

And politically, they tend to a more conservative path. Rush is big with
military, as a whole, regardless of demography.

Programming AFN is not like programming WKSC.
As past part of a comittee to get two AFRTS stations in Puerto Rico closed
(they were) I find that statement disingenuous.
Why did you want them closed?

Wouldn't they let you pretend that you owned them?


There's a lot of anti-military in this country. I live about 5
minutes from Great Lakes. It's shameful the way men and women in uniform
are treated in public, here.

I was behind a woman at Wal-Mart in Waukegan about 3 months ago. She
was clearly stocking up, and was burning up some serious time in the
checkout line. The guy behind me was grousing about it.

I noticed her ID on a lanyard around her neck. And asked if she was
Navy. She affirmed she was, and I thanked her for her service. You
should have heard the noise. From others in line. From others in
adjacent lines. The cashier had the good sense to be quiet, but was
clearly disamused.

The pride with which Gleason asserts his part in getting two AFRTS
stations closed only underscores the assertion sometime back that the
only thing we've ever heard him renounce is his citizenship.
Amen to that.

We've a ships reunion next year at or near Great Lakes, so perhaps I'll get down
that way.


Do.

I certainly hope to do so. Been 30 years or more since I saw a lot of those guys.



That's going to be an emotional weekend.

You bet! But it'll be a fun weekend.

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


So it was really because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...



No, it was because the 120 station strong Puerto Rico Broadcasters
Association felt the stations were illegal. And they were.

Illegal my ass...

It was really because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned them...

Big 89 Rewind
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


So it was really because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...



No, it was because the 120 station strong Puerto Rico Broadcasters
Association felt the stations were illegal. And they were.

Illegal my ass...

It was really because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...

AFRTS Buchannan could be easily heard in Hato Rey, Old San Juan and Cataño
and the northern reaches of Guaynabo, very illegal coverage. AFRTS Ramey
could be heard on the coast as far as Isabela to the East and Aguada and
Moca to the West and Southwest.

That's totally illegal. The proof is that both switched to low power FM when
the PRBA presented its case.

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
... The pride
with which Gleason asserts his part in getting two AFRTS
stations closed only underscores the assertion sometime back that the only
thing we've ever heard him renounce is his citizenship.


The driving force in closing AFRTS Ramey and AFRTS Buchanan was the PRBA
which objected, on legal grounds, to those stations covering way too much of
the civilian population when an LPFM would suffice. Considering that, at the
time, the environmental damage and health risk the Navy was putting the
Municipality of Vieques through at the time, the PRBA was rather adamant
about this invasion of Puerto Rican airwaves by the US military.







Once again, you demonstrate my point for me.

Big 89 Rewind
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
... The
pride with which Gleason asserts his part in getting two AFRTS
stations closed only underscores the assertion sometime back that the
only thing we've ever heard him renounce is his citizenship.


The driving force in closing AFRTS Ramey and AFRTS Buchanan was the PRBA
which objected, on legal grounds, to those stations covering way too much
of the civilian population when an LPFM would suffice. Considering that,
at the time, the environmental damage and health risk the Navy was
putting the Municipality of Vieques through at the time, the PRBA was
rather adamant about this invasion of Puerto Rican airwaves by the US
military.





Once again, you demonstrate my point for me.

If the point is to show how many ugly things the US has done abroad, then
that's right.

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


So it was really because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...



No, it was because the 120 station strong Puerto Rico Broadcasters
Association felt the stations were illegal. And they were.

Illegal my ass...

It was really because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...

AFRTS Buchannan could be easily heard in Hato Rey, Old San Juan and Cataño
and the northern reaches of Guaynabo, very illegal coverage. AFRTS Ramey
could be heard on the coast as far as Isabela to the East and Aguada and
Moca to the West and Southwest.

That's totally illegal. The proof is that both switched to low power FM when
the PRBA presented its case.

You were just upset because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
... The
pride with which Gleason asserts his part in getting two AFRTS
stations closed only underscores the assertion sometime back that the
only thing we've ever heard him renounce is his citizenship.

The driving force in closing AFRTS Ramey and AFRTS Buchanan was the PRBA
which objected, on legal grounds, to those stations covering way too much
of the civilian population when an LPFM would suffice. Considering that,
at the time, the environmental damage and health risk the Navy was
putting the Municipality of Vieques through at the time, the PRBA was
rather adamant about this invasion of Puerto Rican airwaves by the US
military.




Once again, you demonstrate my point for me.

If the point is to show how many ugly things the US has done abroad, then
that's right.


Again, the only thing you renounce.....

Big 89 Rewind
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...



That's totally illegal. The proof is that both switched to low power FM
when
the PRBA presented its case.

You were just upset because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...


You sound like the drunk soldiers the Puerto Rican police had to pick up all
the time around the bases on the Island. 24 hours of dry out before handing
them over to the MP wagon usually brought them back to normal. I would
imagine you will try to dry out tomorrow so you can work up the energy to go
to the liquor store to buy some cheap stuff for next weekend.

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message
...

That's totally illegal. The proof is that both switched to low power FM
when
the PRBA presented its case.
You were just upset because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...


You sound like the drunk soldiers the Puerto Rican police had to pick up all
the time around the bases on the Island. 24 hours of dry out before handing
them over to the MP wagon usually brought them back to normal. I would
imagine you will try to dry out tomorrow so you can work up the energy to go
to the liquor store to buy some cheap stuff for next weekend.




Ah...this from an accessory-after-the-fact to illegal activity.

I'm sure Steve's properly humiliated.

Big 89 Rewind
 

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...

AFRTS Buchannan could be easily heard in Hato Rey, Old San Juan and Cataño
and the northern reaches of Guaynabo, very illegal coverage. AFRTS Ramey
could be heard on the coast as far as Isabela to the East and Aguada and
Moca to the West and Southwest.

That's totally illegal. The proof is that both switched to low power FM
when the PRBA presented its case.


That's a lie. Everyone knows that a radio station can't be heard beyond
their COL. Eduardo says so... oh, wait....

Big 89 Rewind
 

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...

AFRTS Buchannan could be easily heard in Hato Rey, Old San Juan and
Cataño and the northern reaches of Guaynabo, very illegal coverage. AFRTS
Ramey could be heard on the coast as far as Isabela to the East and
Aguada and Moca to the West and Southwest.

That's totally illegal. The proof is that both switched to low power FM
when the PRBA presented its case.


That's a lie. Everyone knows that a radio station can't be heard beyond
their COL. Eduardo says so... oh, wait....

An AFRTS on an ADMINISTRATIVE base that is less than a square mile does not
need to put 10 mv/m over an area 10 mi8les away. A carrier current AM would
have worked; the other AM at Ramey has such a good signal it was DXed nearly
2000 miles away and could be piced up easily for more than 20 miles from the
base on land. Neither obeyed either the spirit or the intent of the
restrictions on AFRTS stations... starting with the fact that putting them
on US soil and then allowing them to compete over areas as big as several
hundred square miles of off-base US territory was not appropriate. If there
had been an AFRTS station at one of the San Antonio bases that could be
heard in downtown SA it would have been closed in about 90 seconds.

Big 89 Rewind
 

On Jun 1, 6:58*am, Dave wrote:
Telamon wrote:
In article ,
*"David Eduardo" wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
dxAce wrote:
David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...
D Peter Maus wrote:
* *Apparently, they finally succeeded in achieving that goal.
I'll have to check the shortwave relays next week to see if Rush is
still
on. I
recall the push to at least get him off, seemingly in contrast to what
the
troops
wanted.

How many of the troops are over 45 or 50? There are very few talk
listeners
(of the WLS / WJR / WGN type) under that age, so it makes sense to look
for
programming the bulk of the armed forces would enjoy, not just somebody
who
has been in long enough to make light bird or above.
Or maybe the troops just like Rush?

* Isn't it amazing that never occurs to programmers?

When nearly nobody in the 18-34 demo in the US listens to Rush or any other
political talker, why would they listen when abroad?

Nice spin. People that call in to the program don't sound over 50. They
sound like they are 20 to 40 years old. Mom's with kids and many topics
revolve around kids, school.

- How many calls does El Oxycontin-bo
- take in the course of 3 hours?

Dave,

For the most part People "Tune-in" and Listen to hear
Rush Limbaugh 'do' Rush Limbaugh*.
* Rush Limbaugh's Show Ain't About Call-Ins :
It's About Rush Limbaugh Bloviating to the Extreme.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh

Whereas People "Tune-in" to Listen to Sean Hannity to
hear Sean Hannity* and His Guests plus some Callers.
* Sean Hannity's Show is more than Sean Hannity -but-
Sean Hannity still Bloviates most of the air time away.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Hannity

at least that is the way i hear it on the radio ~ RHF

Big 89 Rewind
 

Dave wrote:

I have to climb ladders and rigging sometimes. If I couldn't do that
I'd be severely limited in my ability to rake in the bongos.

Rake in the bongos? Is that like cashing in the castanets? Depositing
the dxAces? No, wait, that last one is a bowel movement.


mike

--
Due to the insane amount of spam and garbage, this filter
blocks all postings from Gmail, Google Mail and Google Groups.

http://improve-usenet.org/

AFN Sending a Message to the US Troops : Conservative Talk Radio-versus- NPR
 

On Jun 1, 6:44*am, D Peter Maus wrote:
dxAce wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
dxAce wrote:
David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...
D Peter Maus wrote:
* *Apparently, they finally succeeded in achieving that goal.
I'll have to check the shortwave relays next week to see if Rush is
still
on. I
recall the push to at least get him off, seemingly in contrast to what
the
troops
wanted.

How many of the troops are over 45 or 50? There are very few talk
listeners
(of the WLS / WJR / WGN type) under that age, so it makes sense to look
for
programming the bulk of the armed forces would enjoy, not just somebody
who
has been in long enough to make light bird or above.
Or maybe the troops just like Rush?

* Isn't it amazing that never occurs to programmers?

When nearly nobody in the 18-34 demo in the US listens to Rush or any other
political talker, why would they listen when abroad?

Maybe they want the truth from home.

* *He doesn't get it, Steve.

* *Consider that there are a number of things that are not like things
at home. One is that the listener him/herself is different. They're
committed. They're focussed. They're trained. They've volunteered to
serve. They're politically active at the most basic level. They're less
concerned about the fluff that dominates the evening news than they are
defending the fundamental freedoms that permit the behaviours that lead
to the fluff that dominates the evening news.

* *That takes them off most squares of the psychographic grid. Hometown
demography doesn't apply. They're a different type of people with
listening tastes and habits that reflect a different type of lifestyle.

* *Another consideration is that there are dramatically fewer choices
for listening in theatre. Unlike you and me, who have a dial full of
selections, troops in theatre have a fraction of the offerings. They
listen, as you say, for fresh truths from home. Not for the latest
George Michael release.

* *And politically, they tend to a more conservative path. Rush is big
with military, as a whole, regardless of demography.

* *Programming AFN is not like programming WKSC.

* *Drop Gleason into a Marine base in-country and he'd get a dose of
reality he assiduously avoids in his current position.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

AFN Sending a Message to the US Troops :

Conservative Talk Radio re-affirms to the US Troops
# 1 - Support From Home
# 2 - Why They Are Fighting

NPR -informs- the US Troops
# 1 - Some Americans Hate Them
# 2 - Many Politicians Do Not Support Them.
# 3 - They Have No Reason To Be Fighting
# 4 - They Are 'potentially' War Criminals

at least that is the way i hear it on the radio ~ RHF

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...



That's totally illegal. The proof is that both switched to low power FM
when
the PRBA presented its case.

You were just upset because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...


You sound like the drunk soldiers the Puerto Rican police had to pick up all
the time around the bases on the Island. 24 hours of dry out before handing
them over to the MP wagon usually brought them back to normal. I would
imagine you will try to dry out tomorrow so you can work up the energy to go
to the liquor store to buy some cheap stuff for next weekend.

I would imagine that tomorrow you'll be back here yet again prancing as the fake
Hispanic you are!

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...

AFRTS Buchannan could be easily heard in Hato Rey, Old San Juan and
Cataño and the northern reaches of Guaynabo, very illegal coverage. AFRTS
Ramey could be heard on the coast as far as Isabela to the East and
Aguada and Moca to the West and Southwest.

That's totally illegal. The proof is that both switched to low power FM
when the PRBA presented its case.


That's a lie. Everyone knows that a radio station can't be heard beyond
their COL. Eduardo says so... oh, wait....

An AFRTS on an ADMINISTRATIVE base that is less than a square mile does not
need to put 10 mv/m over an area 10 mi8les away. A carrier current AM would
have worked; the other AM at Ramey has such a good signal it was DXed nearly
2000 miles away and could be piced up easily for more than 20 miles from the
base on land. Neither obeyed either the spirit or the intent of the
restrictions on AFRTS stations... starting with the fact that putting them
on US soil and then allowing them to compete over areas as big as several
hundred square miles of off-base US territory was not appropriate. If there
had been an AFRTS station at one of the San Antonio bases that could be
heard in downtown SA it would have been closed in about 90 seconds.

Guess you'd better try and find some other place to go, and renounce your
citizenship, boy.

Extremely heavy emphasis on the BOY.

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...

AFRTS Buchannan could be easily heard in Hato Rey, Old San Juan and
Cataño and the northern reaches of Guaynabo, very illegal coverage. AFRTS
Ramey could be heard on the coast as far as Isabela to the East and
Aguada and Moca to the West and Southwest.

That's totally illegal. The proof is that both switched to low power FM
when the PRBA presented its case.


That's a lie. Everyone knows that a radio station can't be heard beyond
their COL. Eduardo says so... oh, wait....

An AFRTS on an ADMINISTRATIVE base that is less than a square mile does not
need to put 10 mv/m over an area 10 mi8les away. A carrier current AM would
have worked; the other AM at Ramey has such a good signal it was DXed nearly
2000 miles away and could be piced up easily for more than 20 miles from the
base on land. Neither obeyed either the spirit or the intent of the
restrictions on AFRTS stations... starting with the fact that putting them
on US soil and then allowing them to compete over areas as big as several
hundred square miles of off-base US territory was not appropriate. If there
had been an AFRTS station at one of the San Antonio bases that could be
heard in downtown SA it would have been closed in about 90 seconds.

A lot of folks lived off base?

But, at any rate, as usual, you are way off base, 'Eduardo'.

Give it up, and leave the country, yet again.

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


So it was really because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...



No, it was because the 120 station strong Puerto Rico Broadcasters
Association felt the stations were illegal. And they were.

Illegal my ass...

It was really because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...

AFRTS Buchannan could be easily heard in Hato Rey, Old San Juan and Cataño
and the northern reaches of Guaynabo, very illegal coverage. AFRTS Ramey
could be heard on the coast as far as Isabela to the East and Aguada and
Moca to the West and Southwest.

It's a government radio station, providing info to gov't personnel.

Stop whining, you pathetic little prick.

Big 89 Rewind
 

dxAce wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


So it was really because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...



No, it was because the 120 station strong Puerto Rico Broadcasters
Association felt the stations were illegal. And they were.

Illegal my ass...

It was really because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...

AFRTS Buchannan could be easily heard in Hato Rey, Old San Juan and Cataño
and the northern reaches of Guaynabo, very illegal coverage. AFRTS Ramey
could be heard on the coast as far as Isabela to the East and Aguada and
Moca to the West and Southwest.

It's a government radio station, providing info to gov't personnel.

Stop whining, you pathetic little prick.

All the more reason to support the Deport David 'Eduardo' Frackelton Gleason
Movement.

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...



That's totally illegal. The proof is that both switched to low power FM
when
the PRBA presented its case.

You were just upset because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...


You sound like the drunk soldiers the Puerto Rican police had to pick up all
the time around the bases on the Island. 24 hours of dry out before handing
them over to the MP wagon usually brought them back to normal. I would
imagine you will try to dry out tomorrow so you can work up the energy to go
to the liquor store to buy some cheap stuff for next weekend.

You'll be in Mexico in a week or so stocking up not only on the cheap stuff, but
you'll be getting some of the other 'cheap stuff', won't you boy?

Big 89 Rewind
 

On Jun 1, 3:24*pm, dxAce wrote:
David Eduardo wrote:
"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...

AFRTS Buchannan could be easily heard in Hato Rey, Old San Juan and
Cataño and the northern reaches of Guaynabo, very illegal coverage. AFRTS
Ramey could be heard on the coast as far as Isabela to the East and
Aguada and Moca to the West and Southwest.

That's totally illegal. The proof is that both switched to low power FM
when the PRBA presented its case.

That's a lie. Everyone knows that a radio station can't be heard beyond
their COL. Eduardo says so... oh, wait....

An AFRTS on an ADMINISTRATIVE base that is less than a square mile does not
need to put 10 mv/m over an area 10 mi8les away. A carrier current AM would
have worked; the other AM at Ramey has such a good signal it was DXed nearly
2000 miles away and could be piced up easily for more than 20 miles from the
base on land. Neither obeyed either the spirit or the intent of the
restrictions on AFRTS stations... starting with the fact that putting them
on US soil and then allowing them to compete over areas as big as several
hundred square miles of off-base US territory was not appropriate. If there
had been an AFRTS station at one of the San Antonio bases that could be
heard in downtown SA it would have been closed in about 90 seconds.

Guess you'd better try and find some other place to go, and renounce your
citizenship, boy.

- Extremely heavy emphasis on the BOY.

Extremely heavy Audio Processing emphasis on the BOY.
http://www.solidynepro.com/documentos/JAES-07-ENG.pdf

# 27 - Breaking the Language Barrier - Gringos in Spanish Radio
http://www.nabstore.com/2007-radio-s...ecord2007.html

Big 89 Rewind
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...

AFRTS Buchannan could be easily heard in Hato Rey, Old San Juan and
Cataño and the northern reaches of Guaynabo, very illegal coverage.
AFRTS
Ramey could be heard on the coast as far as Isabela to the East and
Aguada and Moca to the West and Southwest.

That's totally illegal. The proof is that both switched to low power
FM
when the PRBA presented its case.


That's a lie. Everyone knows that a radio station can't be heard beyond
their COL. Eduardo says so... oh, wait....

An AFRTS on an ADMINISTRATIVE base that is less than a square mile does
not
need to put 10 mv/m over an area 10 mi8les away. A carrier current AM
would
have worked; the other AM at Ramey has such a good signal it was DXed
nearly
2000 miles away and could be piced up easily for more than 20 miles from
the
base on land. Neither obeyed either the spirit or the intent of the
restrictions on AFRTS stations... starting with the fact that putting
them
on US soil and then allowing them to compete over areas as big as several
hundred square miles of off-base US territory was not appropriate. If
there
had been an AFRTS station at one of the San Antonio bases that could be
heard in downtown SA it would have been closed in about 90 seconds.

A lot of folks lived off base?

No, nearly none lived off base.

Big 89 Rewind
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


So it was really because they wouldn't let you pretend that you
owned
them...



No, it was because the 120 station strong Puerto Rico Broadcasters
Association felt the stations were illegal. And they were.

Illegal my ass...

It was really because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...

AFRTS Buchannan could be easily heard in Hato Rey, Old San Juan and
Cataño
and the northern reaches of Guaynabo, very illegal coverage. AFRTS Ramey
could be heard on the coast as far as Isabela to the East and Aguada and
Moca to the West and Southwest.

It's a government radio station, providing info to gov't personnel.

No, it is a Military station intended to serve, and only serve, military
personnel on base. In fact, in US territories where the FCC licenses
stations, they are not supposed to get any signal off the base.

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...

AFRTS Buchannan could be easily heard in Hato Rey, Old San Juan and
Cataño and the northern reaches of Guaynabo, very illegal coverage.
AFRTS
Ramey could be heard on the coast as far as Isabela to the East and
Aguada and Moca to the West and Southwest.

That's totally illegal. The proof is that both switched to low power
FM
when the PRBA presented its case.


That's a lie. Everyone knows that a radio station can't be heard beyond
their COL. Eduardo says so... oh, wait....

An AFRTS on an ADMINISTRATIVE base that is less than a square mile does
not
need to put 10 mv/m over an area 10 mi8les away. A carrier current AM
would
have worked; the other AM at Ramey has such a good signal it was DXed
nearly
2000 miles away and could be piced up easily for more than 20 miles from
the
base on land. Neither obeyed either the spirit or the intent of the
restrictions on AFRTS stations... starting with the fact that putting
them
on US soil and then allowing them to compete over areas as big as several
hundred square miles of off-base US territory was not appropriate. If
there
had been an AFRTS station at one of the San Antonio bases that could be
heard in downtown SA it would have been closed in about 90 seconds.

A lot of folks lived off base?

No, nearly none lived off base.

No matter, you're off base, you whiny little SOB. Heavy emphasis on the SOB,
boy.

Big 89 Rewind
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...



That's totally illegal. The proof is that both switched to low power
FM
when
the PRBA presented its case.

You were just upset because they wouldn't let you pretend that you
owned
them...


You sound like the drunk soldiers the Puerto Rican police had to pick up
all
the time around the bases on the Island. 24 hours of dry out before
handing
them over to the MP wagon usually brought them back to normal. I would
imagine you will try to dry out tomorrow so you can work up the energy to
go
to the liquor store to buy some cheap stuff for next weekend.

You'll be in Mexico in a week or so stocking up not only on the cheap
stuff, but
you'll be getting some of the other 'cheap stuff', won't you boy?

No, actually I will be in NY. Stop by the Parker Meridien for a visit, why
don'cha?

I have not been to Mexico since 2004 when I conducted a seminar for
Arbitron.

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


So it was really because they wouldn't let you pretend that you
owned
them...



No, it was because the 120 station strong Puerto Rico Broadcasters
Association felt the stations were illegal. And they were.

Illegal my ass...

It was really because they wouldn't let you pretend that you owned
them...

AFRTS Buchannan could be easily heard in Hato Rey, Old San Juan and
Cataño
and the northern reaches of Guaynabo, very illegal coverage. AFRTS Ramey
could be heard on the coast as far as Isabela to the East and Aguada and
Moca to the West and Southwest.

It's a government radio station, providing info to gov't personnel.

No, it is a Military station intended to serve, and only serve, military
personnel on base. In fact, in US territories where the FCC licenses
stations, they are not supposed to get any signal off the base.

Any signal? Obviously you're showing yet again your ignorance of real radio, you
stinking little prick.

Get the hell out of my country, boy, and head back to where those who appreciate
little NAZI *******s such as yourself, you little faux Hispanic piece of ****.

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...



That's totally illegal. The proof is that both switched to low power
FM
when
the PRBA presented its case.

You were just upset because they wouldn't let you pretend that you
owned
them...


You sound like the drunk soldiers the Puerto Rican police had to pick up
all
the time around the bases on the Island. 24 hours of dry out before
handing
them over to the MP wagon usually brought them back to normal. I would
imagine you will try to dry out tomorrow so you can work up the energy to
go
to the liquor store to buy some cheap stuff for next weekend.

You'll be in Mexico in a week or so stocking up not only on the cheap
stuff, but
you'll be getting some of the other 'cheap stuff', won't you boy?

No, actually I will be in NY. Stop by the Parker Meridien for a visit, why
don'cha?

Is that the gay place to be?

I have not been to Mexico since 2004 when I conducted a seminar for
Arbitron.

Somehow I doubt that.

Big 89 Rewind
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:


An AFRTS on an ADMINISTRATIVE base that is less than a square mile
does
not
need to put 10 mv/m over an area 10 mi8les away. A carrier current AM
would
have worked; the other AM at Ramey has such a good signal it was DXed
nearly
2000 miles away and could be piced up easily for more than 20 miles
from
the
base on land. Neither obeyed either the spirit or the intent of the
restrictions on AFRTS stations... starting with the fact that putting
them
on US soil and then allowing them to compete over areas as big as
several
hundred square miles of off-base US territory was not appropriate. If
there
had been an AFRTS station at one of the San Antonio bases that could
be
heard in downtown SA it would have been closed in about 90 seconds.

A lot of folks lived off base?

No, nearly none lived off base.

No matter, you're off base, you whiny little SOB. Heavy emphasis on the
SOB,
boy.

What part of the fact that the AFRTS stations were operating illegally in a
US territory don't you get? The local broadcasters association formed a
committee to investigate the operational restrictions on AFRTS stations
inside the US and its territories and filed a complaint with the AFRTS board
as well as with the FCC as an interested party and prevailed, getting the
two offending stations closed. An in-compliance limited signal FM at the
now-closed submarine base at Naguabo continued operation as it did not put a
significant signal off base and was judged to be within the spirit of the
AFRTS operational dictates.

RW OnLine Newsbytes : Interep - Survey Says Older Demographic StillYields Clout -example- KMPH-AM "The Patriot" 840 kHz Modesto, CA
 

On Jun 1, 10:35*am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in ...

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message

*You're contradicting yourself, again. If they're not listening, they
can't be calling.

"Youngest demos" for talk is generally35-44.

- - Nice evasion.

- Nope. Truth. When a format is typically 25+, the young part
is35-54.

d'Eduardo - D'Oh ! and the Older Part is 55+ - d'oh again ~ RHF

RW OnLine Newsbytes :

Interep - Survey Says Older Demographic Still Yields Clout
http://www.rwonline.com/dailynews/sh...nth=12&week=50

-source- RW OnLine - Radio World Newspaper {USA}
http://www.rwonline.com/contact_us.shtml

59 Million Consumers who are Ages 55 Years or Older
and make up 21% of the Population growing to 25% by
2010. - - - For more information visit : www.interep.com.

=EXAMPLE=
AM 840 (kHz) KMPH in Modesto, CA just changed it form
"Music with Class" to Talk Radio "The PATRIOT" with a
target audience of 50+ -WHY- Because in a Market with
20 or more AM Radio Stations to Listen To : The Over-50
Group is 25% of the Population; and the Over-65 Group is
12% of the Population; and both Groups make up even
more larger Percentages of the Radio Listening Public.
Plus AM 840 KMPH "The PATRIOT" has enough Local
Talent and Programming on the Air {Local Content} to
make it 'sound' like a Local Radio Station.
http://www.kmph840.com/
http://www.modestoradiomuseum.org/km...0page%201.html
https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...k/geos/us.html
http://www.sfradiomuseum.com/blog/20...sto-am-to.html

One-in-20 is 5% and when a Radio Station has a 'chance'
to Define itsels as "The Radio Station for the Over-50-Crowd
it is looking at a better than even Market Share with a
'potential' 2~3 Multiple. Most/Many of the 'other' Radio
Stations are going after the Prime Sellable Demographic
of 18~35 Years for Advertisers and Revenue. But if you
Listen to KMPH you will hear Advertisers with Products
that are Used and Needed by those Over-the-Age-of-50
and that to is a good consistant source of Advertising
Revenue for a Radio Station.

The same goes for the FM Radio Band and FM Radio
Stations : Wherever there is 20 or more FM Radio Stations
in a Metro {Serving a Community} there is room for one
of those Radio Stations to be "The Music Radio Station"
for the Over-the-Age-of-50 Group. Plus there are a large
number of Advertisers with Products and Services that
are Used and Needed by those Over-the-Age-of-50 and
that are a good consistant source of Advertising Revenue
for an FM Music Radio Station.

Forget IBOC : AM & FM Radio Featuring the Right Content
for the Right Audience : It $ell$ ~ RHF

Big 89 Rewind
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


No, it is a Military station intended to serve, and only serve, military
personnel on base. In fact, in US territories where the FCC licenses
stations, they are not supposed to get any signal off the base.

Any signal? Obviously you're showing yet again your ignorance of real
radio, you
stinking little prick.

The actual term is "significant signal" and that means that such a station
should not be listenable more than a few hundred meters from a base. Use of
carrier current or very low power FM is the answer.

How many AFRTS stations can you find in the Lower 48 that can be heard off
base?

Get the hell out of my country, boy, and head back to where those who
appreciate
little NAZI *******s such as yourself, you little faux Hispanic piece of
****.

An Hispanic is one who is culturally Hispanic... I sure would not like to be
of your nasty culture

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:


An AFRTS on an ADMINISTRATIVE base that is less than a square mile
does
not
need to put 10 mv/m over an area 10 mi8les away. A carrier current AM
would
have worked; the other AM at Ramey has such a good signal it was DXed
nearly
2000 miles away and could be piced up easily for more than 20 miles
from
the
base on land. Neither obeyed either the spirit or the intent of the
restrictions on AFRTS stations... starting with the fact that putting
them
on US soil and then allowing them to compete over areas as big as
several
hundred square miles of off-base US territory was not appropriate. If
there
had been an AFRTS station at one of the San Antonio bases that could
be
heard in downtown SA it would have been closed in about 90 seconds.

A lot of folks lived off base?

No, nearly none lived off base.

No matter, you're off base, you whiny little SOB. Heavy emphasis on the
SOB,
boy.

What part of the fact that the AFRTS stations were operating illegally in a
US territory don't you get? The local broadcasters association formed a
committee to investigate the operational restrictions on AFRTS stations
inside the US and its territories and filed a complaint with the AFRTS board
as well as with the FCC as an interested party and prevailed, getting the
two offending stations closed. An in-compliance limited signal FM at the
now-closed submarine base at Naguabo continued operation as it did not put a
significant signal off base and was judged to be within the spirit of the
AFRTS operational dictates.

As always, 'Eduardo, I think you're full of ****. You've been full of **** for
quite a number of years, not only here, but in numerous radio clubs throughout
our great land.

Hit the road, SOB.

Big 89 Rewind
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...



No, actually I will be in NY. Stop by the Parker Meridien for a visit,
why
don'cha?

Is that the gay place to be?

No, actually you can look it up and find out what kind of place it is.

I have not been to Mexico since 2004 when I conducted a seminar for
Arbitron.

Somehow I doubt that.

Contact: Clara Carneiro of Arbitron in Columbia, MD., for whom I did about a
half dozen ratings seminars in Mexico for Arbitron clients and for the
Broadcasters Association of the Valley of Mexico.

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


No, it is a Military station intended to serve, and only serve, military
personnel on base. In fact, in US territories where the FCC licenses
stations, they are not supposed to get any signal off the base.

Any signal? Obviously you're showing yet again your ignorance of real
radio, you
stinking little prick.

The actual term is "significant signal" and that means that such a station
should not be listenable more than a few hundred meters from a base. Use of
carrier current or very low power FM is the answer.

How many AFRTS stations can you find in the Lower 48 that can be heard off
base?

Get the hell out of my country, boy, and head back to where those who
appreciate
little NAZI *******s such as yourself, you little faux Hispanic piece of
****.

An Hispanic is one who is culturally Hispanic... I sure would not like to be
of your nasty culture

You're full of ****, SOB.

Now hit the the road as you are NOT Hispanic, never have been, never will be.

Big 89 Rewind
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:


What part of the fact that the AFRTS stations were operating illegally in
a
US territory don't you get? The local broadcasters association formed a
committee to investigate the operational restrictions on AFRTS stations
inside the US and its territories and filed a complaint with the AFRTS
board
as well as with the FCC as an interested party and prevailed, getting the
two offending stations closed. An in-compliance limited signal FM at the
now-closed submarine base at Naguabo continued operation as it did not
put a
significant signal off base and was judged to be within the spirit of the
AFRTS operational dictates.

As always, 'Eduardo, I think you're full of ****. You've been full of ****
for
quite a number of years, not only here, but in numerous radio clubs
throughout
our great land.


The fact is that the PRBA got the AFRTS stations closed down for operating
outside the parameters of such a station.

Big 89 Rewind
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...



No, actually I will be in NY. Stop by the Parker Meridien for a visit,
why
don'cha?

Is that the gay place to be?

No, actually you can look it up and find out what kind of place it is.

I have not been to Mexico since 2004 when I conducted a seminar for
Arbitron.

Somehow I doubt that.

Contact: Clara Carneiro of Arbitron in Columbia, MD., for whom I did about a
half dozen ratings seminars in Mexico for Arbitron clients and for the
Broadcasters Association of the Valley of Mexico.

Were you the blower or the blowee?