"Steve" wrote in message
ps.com...

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.

You don't read these comments very closely, do you Tardo? At least half
a dozen posters have answered every one of the above points, but you
didn't even READ their posts.

No, no body has answered the points. They have complained and put out
information that is false.

1. There is a marked improvement in AM quality on HD, making it comparable
to analog FM.
2. FM HD offers additional free channels.
3. The listener does not pay for HD.
4. The listener pays for satellite radio.
5. The lsitener pays for delivery for streaming, wifi, WiMax, etc.
6. There is no other band available for digital in the US.
7. Any change in delivery requires new radios, whether satellite, broadband
or whatever.
8. HD is just beginning its consumer marketing, so it is early to expect
reasonably priced radios.
9. All new consumer electronics start at high prices: CD, DVD, TV, Cellular,
etc.
10. There is hardly any listening to out of market signals.
11. AM will not survive without some "tonic" to revive its relevancy among
listeners advertisers want to reach.
12. AM for under-45 listeners is already dead.
13. The "Digital" term is very important to a large mass of consumers.

David Frackelton Gleason, posing as 'Eduardo', fake Hispanic since c.2000
stopped digitally stimulating himself long enough to write:

"Steve" wrote in message
ps.com...

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.

You don't read these comments very closely, do you Tardo? At least half
a dozen posters have answered every one of the above points, but you
didn't even READ their posts.

No, no body has answered the points. They have complained and put out
information that is false.

False information? Say it ain't so, oh fake one.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 16:50:35 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:


"Steve" wrote in message

3. The listener does not pay for HD.
4. The listener pays for satellite radio.
Don't be absurd. You pay for so-called free radio every time you buy
one of the bull**** consumer products or services advertised thereon.

"David" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 16:50:35 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:


"Steve" wrote in message

3. The listener does not pay for HD.
4. The listener pays for satellite radio.
Don't be absurd. You pay for so-called free radio every time you buy
one of the bull**** consumer products or services advertised thereon.

That is a real load. You do not have to buy anything to use terrestrial
radio.

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 19:35:43 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:


"David" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 16:50:35 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:


"Steve" wrote in message

3. The listener does not pay for HD.
4. The listener pays for satellite radio.
Don't be absurd. You pay for so-called free radio every time you buy
one of the bull**** consumer products or services advertised thereon.

That is a real load. You do not have to buy anything to use terrestrial
radio.



That's not what you said (and I quote)

''3. The listener does not pay for HD.''

You pay hidden costs for advertising when you buy ''brand name''
products (whether you listen to the radio or not). That's worse than
taxation without representation.

David wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 16:50:35 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:


"Steve" wrote in message

3. The listener does not pay for HD.
4. The listener pays for satellite radio.

- Don't be absurd. You pay for so-called free radio
- every time you buy one of the bull**** consumer
- products or services advertised thereon.

DaviD - Yes I Do Gladly - GLADY ! ~ RHF
{ Advertising Makes Me An Informed Consumer }

OBTW - Count-Up the Square Inches of Ads in a
local Newspaper against the Number of Square
Inches of Actual News in that same local Newspaper.
- - - The same local Newspaper that you pay-cash-money-for {buy}.

Commercial Radio and TV are practically AD Free in-comparison - IMHO

On 20 Jul 2006 02:01:11 -0700, "RHF"
wrote:


OBTW - Count-Up the Square Inches of Ads in a
local Newspaper against the Number of Square
Inches of Actual News in that same local Newspaper.
- - - The same local Newspaper that you pay-cash-money-for {buy}.

Commercial Radio and TV are practically AD Free in-comparison - IMHO
.
That's an invalid comparison. Newspapers are parallel, radio is
serial.