"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article t,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

Every alternative costs more than an HD radio. Radio stays viable as a
free
medium, the listener gets more channels and the price of receivers will
come
down. And the analog signal will not be going away any time soon.

It will cost more to broadcasters. We would not do it if it did not
protect
the future and enhance revenue. It is a business.

Why would another band cost more money for the listener?

The chances of a new band are non-existent, and would require totally new,
non-backwards-compatible radios.

Why would
partitioning the current band into HD and analog cost more money for the
listener? Why would other transmission schemes cost more money for the
listener?

Other systems, like WiMax, etc., have fees for the delivery technology, and
the "receivers" would initially be as expensive as current HD ones. My first
cellular phone was over $800....

It wouldn't cost the listeners more but it would cost the broadcasters
more money.

It woud cost the lsiteners, as what you suggest obsoletes every radio in
America. And for broadcasters, a new band would cost what HD currently
costs. A total reallocation on AM would simply hasten the death of the band.
Imagine, there are about 1500 directional AMs and many would no longer fit
on current land, or require zoning for new towers or moved ones... probable
average cost of a half-million each!. The average US AM bills $300 thousand
a year.

So your problem is selling IBOC to the listeners where the
benefit is small.

Digital sound, double the channels on FM is small benefit? Free is a small
benefit?

The advantage to IBOC is for the broadcasters. IBOC
might be a way for broadcasters to cut their electric bill when analog
is dropped but that's about it.

Long time away on that.

IBOC will cause listeners to toss their
current radios for new ones that will not sound any better than analog
for local signals either. IBOC is money down the drain for the listener.

HD, on local signals, sounds much better, especially on AM... and FM doubles
the channels at least-

The result is a large cost to the listener for a new radio for little if
any benefit. The listener will not have the option of listening to "out
of market" signals limiting their choices.

In LA, with 9,8 million 12+ persons, the average listening to out of market
/ out of primary signal are stations is about 13,000. Much of this may be
from streaming, or while the listener themselves was out of the market. In
other words, there is essentially no listening now, so nothing is being
disrupted.