IBOC at night and the local/regiona AMs
 

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. net...

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

Right, but RDS would make a good low cost starting point for an expanded
FM
text service. And we'd have it, if somebody thought there was real
money
in
it.

Nobody wants to fight for RDS as it has no competitive advantage and is
not
applicable to AM. As I said, it was developed for European simulcasts to
allow automatic signal seeking, which is not an issue in the USA.



So, radio text needs every potential reader to eke out a profit? 60% of the
audience would not have been enough?

Frank Dresser

IBOC at Night and the Local/Regional AMs
 

David Frackelton Gleason aka Eduardo the fake Hispanic from Cleveland wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
om...

[snip]

Most listening is NOT to AM anymore. Why not accept tha tthis may be
an
opportunity to make AM move viable for the future?


[snip]

So, how does the future of AM radio differ if nighttime IBOC is
approved
or
not?

The quality is vastly better and can attract listeners for a change.

And QRM the adjacent channels to boot. Such a deal for you bean counters.

Actually, I am a programmer and a pretty good one.

That's debatable. If I recall correctly, I've heard some of the stuff you claim
to be responsible for and it sucks.

I am in favor of
anything that extends the life of AM radio or terrestrial radio in general.
The consumer, too, should be in favor of this as commercial-based radio is
free, and every other option has ongoing delivery charges.

There's nothing 'free' about the IBOC QRM destroying two adjacent channels.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

IBOC at Night and the Local/Regional AMs
 

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
et...

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
om...

[snip]

Most listening is NOT to AM anymore. Why not accept tha tthis may be
an
opportunity to make AM move viable for the future?


[snip]

So, how does the future of AM radio differ if nighttime IBOC is
approved
or
not?

The quality is vastly better and can attract listeners for a change.

And QRM the adjacent channels to boot. Such a deal for you bean
counters.

Actually, I am a programmer and a pretty good one. I am in favor of
anything that extends the life of AM radio or terrestrial radio in
general.

Is AM radio or terresterial radio really going to die? If so, how?

If you mean "die as we know it", well, that's always happening. The radio
of 1966 is dead, as is the radio of 1926. Big deal. If nighttime IBOC AM
somehow timecapsules the radio of 2006, it's hardly worth it.


The consumer, too, should be in favor of this as commercial-based radio is
free, and every other option has ongoing delivery charges.



Most podcasting is free, unless you count the cost of the internet
connection. However, downloaders would have the internet connection anyway,
so there's no additional cost.

I can see how the internet might cut into the radio establishment's profits.

Frank Dresser

IBOC at Night and the Local/Regional AMs
 

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
et...

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. com...

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
om...

[snip]

Most listening is NOT to AM anymore. Why not accept tha tthis may be
an
opportunity to make AM move viable for the future?


[snip]

So, how does the future of AM radio differ if nighttime IBOC is
approved
or
not?

The quality is vastly better and can attract listeners for a change.



Where will these new found listeners come from? I've gotten the
impression
just about nobody is listening to the radio during the night.

AM underindexes FM at night. In other words, a higher percentage of night
listening is to FM than in the daytime. Part of this is the night
interference on most AM channels,a nd the additional interference coming
from home electronics. HD at night would give AM the ability to compete
better at night by those stations with decent signals, which leaves out
about 75% of all AMs anyway.



But FM loses most of thier listeners at night. AM underindexes that. So,
at best, AM might lose only the same percentage of audience as FM.

Would the new, improved nighttime IBOC AM stations be luring listeners from
other distractions such as TV and the internet, or would they just be
stealing audience from the non-IBOC AM stations and FM stations?

But, if the entire radio industry is really, really facing an impending
doom, redistributing the audience is little different than rearranging the
deck chairs on the ...

Frank Dresser

IBOC at night and the local/regiona AMs
 

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. net...

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

Right, but RDS would make a good low cost starting point for an
expanded
FM
text service. And we'd have it, if somebody thought there was real
money
in
it.

Nobody wants to fight for RDS as it has no competitive advantage and is
not
applicable to AM. As I said, it was developed for European simulcasts to
allow automatic signal seeking, which is not an issue in the USA.



So, radio text needs every potential reader to eke out a profit? 60% of
the
audience would not have been enough?

texting alone is not a salable benefit. I can't think of a way to make it
so. It is, however, an added benefit, especially to HD digital audio.

IBOC at Night and the Local/Regional AMs
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


There's nothing 'free' about the IBOC QRM destroying two adjacent
channels.

.... that nobody listens to.

IBOC at Night and the Local/Regional AMs
 

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message

Actually, I am a programmer and a pretty good one. I am in favor of
anything that extends the life of AM radio or terrestrial radio in
general.

Is AM radio or terresterial radio really going to die? If so, how?

It is, in business terms, in full matruation and in slow decline. It will
not grwo in usership, and will only grow slightly ahead of inflation in
revenues. At some point in time, the deliver system will be obsolete, but HD
can extend that somewhat.

If you mean "die as we know it", well, that's always happening. The radio
of 1966 is dead, as is the radio of 1926. Big deal. If nighttime IBOC AM
somehow timecapsules the radio of 2006, it's hardly worth it.

Radio will become a content driven industry, rather than a delivery system
model. Radio companies that move desirable content through new delivery
methods will survive. Others will not.

For 84 years, radio has been the same model. Get listeners, sell ads to
reach them. As long as that model is viable, radio will not be changed at
all.


The consumer, too, should be in favor of this as commercial-based radio
is
free, and every other option has ongoing delivery charges.

Most podcasting is free, unless you count the cost of the internet
connection. However, downloaders would have the internet connection
anyway,
so there's no additional cost.

Many of the more desirable podcasts are radio content, available for
listening on demand. It is just like TV wiht a TiVo.

I can see how the internet might cut into the radio establishment's
profits.

It has not so far, and probably the model that will work will be WiMax once
there is adequate bandwidth, low cost and an easy way to find content. A
radio dial is easy. A computer is less easy.

IBOC at Night and the Local/Regional AMs
 

David Frackelton Gleason aka Eduardo the fake Hispanic from Cleveland once again
made no sense when he wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


There's nothing 'free' about the IBOC QRM destroying two adjacent
channels.

... that nobody listens to.

IBOC at Night and the Local/Regional AMs
 

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message

AM underindexes FM at night. In other words, a higher percentage of night
listening is to FM than in the daytime. Part of this is the night
interference on most AM channels,a nd the additional interference coming
from home electronics. HD at night would give AM the ability to compete
better at night by those stations with decent signals, which leaves out
about 75% of all AMs anyway.



But FM loses most of thier listeners at night. AM underindexes that. So,
at best, AM might lose only the same percentage of audience as FM.

No, if AM has 30% of all radio listening in the day, it has 15% at night.

Would the new, improved nighttime IBOC AM stations be luring listeners
from
other distractions such as TV and the internet, or would they just be
stealing audience from the non-IBOC AM stations and FM stations?

I have no idea, as we don ot know where they go. But if the big AMs get
decent daytime numbers, it is possible they will keep thse shares at night.

But, if the entire radio industry is really, really facing an impending
doom, redistributing the audience is little different than rearranging the
deck chairs on the ...

there is no short term danger. Radio is pretty resilient. HD is one example
of how we come up with ways of protecting our franchises. I have seen 45's,
cassettes, 8-tracks, CDs, VHS, BetaMax, CATV, HDTV, Video games, pay per
view, DVDs, computers, the Internet, and plenty more come, and some go. I
think I can survive one or two more attacks before going to live among the
pine trees in Arizona.

IBOC at Night and the Local/Regional AMs
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Frackelton Gleason aka Eduardo the fake Hispanic from Cleveland once
again
made no sense when he wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


There's nothing 'free' about the IBOC QRM destroying two adjacent
channels.

... that nobody listens to.

Nobody listens to the adjacent channels that are next to local stations. So
there is no loss if there is nobody there anyway.