IBOC will be just another failed attempt to "save" AM radio. AM radio died
decades ago as a viable medium.
In 1985 I was in the industry and at that time CQUAM AM Stereo was gonna
save AM Radio. It didn't and IBOC won't.

In about five years we'll be listening to WIFI on our walkmans and car
radio's.


"RHF" wrote in message
oups.com...
For One and All,

IBOC - Redefining AM Radio As We Know It :

To properly implement IBOC in the AM Radio Band
both Day and Night would require that AM Radio
Station Service in the USA be reclassified as a
"Local Voice Media Service".

Reduced - The Power of all Major Market AM Radio
Stations down to 25 KW Day and 10 KW Night

Fix - Regional AM Radio Stations at 10 KW Day
and 5 KW Nights

Allow - Local AM Radio Stations to be rated at
2.5 KW Day and 1 KW Nights.

Low Power - Educational, Community and Translator
AM Radio Stations limited to 250 Watts Day and
100 Watts Night.

ok - so it's another stupid idea ~ RHF
.
.
. .

On Sat, 27 May 2006 11:59:34 GMT, "IonSpot" wrote:

IBOC will be just another failed attempt to "save" AM radio. AM radio died
decades ago as a viable medium.
In 1985 I was in the industry and at that time CQUAM AM Stereo was gonna
save AM Radio. It didn't and IBOC won't.

In about five years we'll be listening to WIFI on our walkmans and car
radio's.


Rush Limbaugh and ethnic saved AM.

"David" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 27 May 2006 11:59:34 GMT, "IonSpot" wrote:

IBOC will be just another failed attempt to "save" AM radio. AM radio
died
decades ago as a viable medium.
In 1985 I was in the industry and at that time CQUAM AM Stereo was gonna
save AM Radio. It didn't and IBOC won't.

In about five years we'll be listening to WIFI on our walkmans and car
radio's.


Rush Limbaugh and ethnic saved AM.

Urban legend.

Rush did not start generating big numbers until the early 90's. What saved
AM was a combination of factors....

1. Repeal of the Fairness Doctrine, allowing more agressive talk radio.
2. Several big companies, like Jacor, Clear Channel, ABC and Infinity
supported news and talk on AM.
3. Most FMs, after programming deregulation in the 80's, dropped most news
and content for music and entertainment. This allowed AMs to be unique in
offering news and content.

By the late 70's, the big Black stations were on FM. So this sector did not
help AM. And Spanish language stations started moving to FM in the very
early 90's, to the point that, as an example, today there are less than 2
shares of Spanish listening on AM in LA and 27 shares on FM. Hispanics don't
use AM much at all, unless ther eis no alternative.

Religious broadcasting did help make marginal AMs viable, though.

The real issue is that a huge percentage of urban located AMs do not cover
the entire market. Some were licensed before the suburban growth of the US
after W.W. II, and others are just bad facilites. In washington DC, there is
not one station that fully covers the entire metro on AM, for example.

Interestingly the AMs with good signals have always been successful.

David,

OK - So I have heard of Rush Limbaugh.
But who is this Mister Ethnic ?) ~ RHF

"RHF" wrote in message
oups.com...
David,

OK - So I have heard of Rush Limbaugh.
But who is this Mister Ethnic ?) ~ RHF
.

,-)

Interestingly, the first ethnic AMs go back to the late 40's, with ones like
WDIA (then self-described as "Memphis' race station") and WOV (with a remote
studio en Rome) being among the early ones. As FM became viable in the very
late 60's and early 70's, nobody at first thought that the ethnic audiences
would be FM users... many thought Hispanics and Blacks would not listen
because the radios were too expensive. Today, 5 of the top 10 LA stations
are Hispanic, so I guess they saved up for the radios.

"IonSpot" wrote in message
...
IBOC will be just another failed attempt to "save" AM radio. AM radio
died decades ago as a viable medium.

I see. then why are two of the top 3 billing stations in San Francisco AM?
In fact, a quarter of the top 100 billing stations in the USA are AM.

In 1985 I was in the industry and at that time CQUAM AM Stereo was gonna
save AM Radio. It didn't and IBOC won't.

AM swtereo was supposed to launch in 1978. A nasty old man, Leonard Kahn,
sued to try to get his system approved, and it was 1983 before a decision
was made. By that time, AM had gone form 60% of all listening to 40%, and
there was no chance to revive it. Plus, the early C Quam was not a
particularly good system, especially in cars.

David Eduardo wrote:
"IonSpot" wrote in message
...
IBOC will be just another failed attempt to "save" AM radio. AM radio
died decades ago as a viable medium.

I see. then why are two of the top 3 billing stations in San Francisco AM?
In fact, a quarter of the top 100 billing stations in the USA are AM.

Without a survey at hand, I assume you are referring to KQED-FM, KGO,
and KCBS.

The bay area has terrible traffic. There are people who drive with KCBS
on the radio all the time. Makes no sense to me as arely does a traffic
report save my arse. The same goes for KGO, though at least they have
talk also.

Due to the terrain of the bay area, AM stations can be heard in more
places. [It's not the LA basin.] Only KFOG comes to mind with a SF and
south bay simulcast, and the number of boosters is quite small.

Most of the San Franciso FMs can't hit the south bay, but the south bay
is part of the the SF region in the Arbitron, right. Even KSFO can
reach south San Jose.


In 1985 I was in the industry and at that time CQUAM AM Stereo was gonna
save AM Radio. It didn't and IBOC won't.

AM swtereo was supposed to launch in 1978. A nasty old man, Leonard Kahn,
sued to try to get his system approved, and it was 1983 before a decision
was made. By that time, AM had gone form 60% of all listening to 40%, and
there was no chance to revive it. Plus, the early C Quam was not a
particularly good system, especially in cars.

wrote in message
oups.com...

David Eduardo wrote:
"IonSpot" wrote in message
...
IBOC will be just another failed attempt to "save" AM radio. AM radio
died decades ago as a viable medium.

I see. then why are two of the top 3 billing stations in San Francisco
AM?
In fact, a quarter of the top 100 billing stations in the USA are AM.

Without a survey at hand, I assume you are referring to KQED-FM, KGO,
and KCBS.

KQED is not AM, and it does not bill ad revenues (they are non-com). KGO,
KCBS and KNBR are top 10 billers (in fact, they ARE the top 3), and KSFO is
very close to being top 10.

The bay area has terrible traffic. There are people who drive with KCBS
on the radio all the time. Makes no sense to me as arely does a traffic
report save my arse. The same goes for KGO, though at least they have
talk also.

In car listening is only 30% of all radio listening in the market.

Due to the terrain of the bay area, AM stations can be heard in more
places. [It's not the LA basin.] Only KFOG comes to mind with a SF and
south bay simulcast, and the number of boosters is quite small.

SF is a better than average AM market, but so is Chicago... WSCR, WLS, WGN
and WBBM are all top 10 billers. No hills, either. It is about being big
signal stations, not about AM vs. FM.

Most of the San Franciso FMs can't hit the south bay, but the south bay
is part of the the SF region in the Arbitron, right. Even KSFO can
reach south San Jose.

SF metro is Santa Rosa to Campbell.

David Eduardo wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

David Eduardo wrote:
"IonSpot" wrote in message
...
IBOC will be just another failed attempt to "save" AM radio. AM radio
died decades ago as a viable medium.

I see. then why are two of the top 3 billing stations in San Francisco
AM?
In fact, a quarter of the top 100 billing stations in the USA are AM.

Without a survey at hand, I assume you are referring to KQED-FM, KGO,
and KCBS.

KQED is not AM, and it does not bill ad revenues (they are non-com). KGO,
KCBS and KNBR are top 10 billers (in fact, they ARE the top 3), and KSFO is
very close to being top 10.

AH, maybe that's why I said KQED-FM. Anyway, I missed the AM in your
original post.

The bay area has terrible traffic. There are people who drive with KCBS
on the radio all the time. Makes no sense to me as arely does a traffic
report save my arse. The same goes for KGO, though at least they have
talk also.

In car listening is only 30% of all radio listening in the market.

Again, you play with stats. What is the in-car listening AM market?
After all, it is AM HD everyone on this list wants to stop. It is QRM!

Due to the terrain of the bay area, AM stations can be heard in more
places. [It's not the LA basin.] Only KFOG comes to mind with a SF and
south bay simulcast, and the number of boosters is quite small.

SF is a better than average AM market, but so is Chicago... WSCR, WLS, WGN
and WBBM are all top 10 billers. No hills, either. It is about being big
signal stations, not about AM vs. FM.

Most of the San Franciso FMs can't hit the south bay, but the south bay
is part of the the SF region in the Arbitron, right. Even KSFO can
reach south San Jose.

SF metro is Santa Rosa to Campbell.

wrote in message
oups.com...

David Eduardo wrote:

The bay area has terrible traffic. There are people who drive with KCBS
on the radio all the time. Makes no sense to me as arely does a traffic
report save my arse. The same goes for KGO, though at least they have
talk also.

In car listening is only 30% of all radio listening in the market.

Again, you play with stats. What is the in-car listening AM market?
After all, it is AM HD everyone on this list wants to stop. It is QRM!

In San Francisco, the AM stations have a 24 share nof in car listening 6 AM
to Midnight. In Morning drive, they have a 25.4% share of all persons
listening to the radio in the car. So SF is actually below the national
average of a 30% share. LA is 31%, NY with lots of public transportaiton,
has a 25% share.