In article ,
Dave wrote:

On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 10:54:31 -0700, SW4ever wrote:

On Sep 19, 9:30Â*am, none ""dave\"@(none)" wrote:
SW4ever wrote:
So another collection of DOLTS who don't get it. Between the three of
them they have screwed up English shortwave to North Americe.
Alternatives MY FOOT. Inconvenient half-baked substitues at weird
hours. Is this a political ploy to screw up Â*communication by World
Band Radio ? Eh? Â*I will not now listen to RNW by any means. As far
as I'm concerned, they can get lost. Over and out. On to Amateur
Radio exclusively.

There are probably no more than 50,000 active SWLs in N. America. Â*Do
you know what it costs to run a 250,000 Watt HF transmitter?

250,000 Watts at 10 cents/kwh = 250 Kwh X 10 cents = $ 25.00
electricity costs per hour. Sure there are other expenses, but these
apply to ALL languge transmissions, and is no big deal to powerhouses
like RNW DW and BBC.
Don't know where you got 50,000 SWLs in N.America. There are many more
than that, I'm sure. Most Ham Radio operators listen to shortwave
regularly, including myself (VE3ARL) Check out ARRL site, they did a
survey some time ago and it should be in their archives, and compare
results to number of Hams in North America let alone number of non- hams
who listen to SW.
Regardless,RNWs decision sucks. They have been a mainstay of SW radio
for a very long time, and they are letting us down. Actually, their
alternative sources are probably more costly than a couple of hours a
day shortwave broadcasting.
73s and Good Listening from SW4ever...

Don't they have to bring in diesel fuel in Bonaire? The transmitters are
less than 100% efficient. The transmitters have tubes which wear out.
Etc. There are 650,000 hams in the USA, and many of them have no
interest in HF. I am an amateur and I virtually never listen to HFBC
except to cgheck propagation. I love web radio. I listen to it when I'm
working BPSK. I get my radio fix same as always.

It costs just as much to broadcast in french as english.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California