David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

What I'm seeing, is interest in HD-AM by users who are interested in AM
content, and who regularly use AM anyway. But little or no interest in
users who do not regularly use AM. Regardless of the audio quality....if
there is no interest in the programming, there will be little interest in
how good it may or may not sound.

Viscious circle there... until there is an audio quality that under-45's can
tolerate, there will be no programming. And as the clock ticks, the band
dies.

The only potential uptick I see is in those auto systems where HD is
included as a standard feature. Sampling of HD, at that point, would be a
natural extension of radio sampling in general...playing with a new radio
in a new car is fairly commonplace. See what it sounds like, on both
bands...even if only to set the presets...there's still sampling going on.
In that context, HD may get a fair hearing, and perhaps some encouraging
acceptance.

That is exactly what will be the make-or-break as to AM. FM is healthy. It
will become healthier with HD 2 channels. It can potentially drage AM back
into the game. This is why none of the big operators has sold a viable AM in
years... all believe the value will be enhanced by HD. That is a
many-billion-dollar gamble.

So, as with most radio techological innovations, it's going to have to be
in the cars in order to expose that captive audience to a fair hearing of
HD-AM for an interest to be generated. (This, despite the fact that a
majority of listening is not in cars.) But for those listeners who would
have to actively pursue an HD experience without current regular AM
usage...I'm not seeing it.

Cars are where Americans are forced to get a new radio. Obviously, there is
a trickle down aspect, as not everyone buys new cars (ever) and not everyone
buys a new car every year or two. But this is the opportunity for AM. It is
not an overnighter, but the band is fading, not exploding.

So far, you've been talking about how the stations love HD-AM. You and
I know that the success of any radio station is found in listener centric
product and behaviour. The point that radio stations love HD-AM is
unimportant. It's the listener's embrace that matters. And outside of
controlled demostrations, there is nothing to suggest that there is more
interest in HD-AM than in C-Quam. And the jury will be out for some time
to come.

We are years away from being able to evaluate listener response, which will
be based on product demand. But the few reports that have started coming in
are favorable. On the FM side, we put a Tejano format on last week ont he
KLTN HD2 channel, and we have registered several hundred calls (the format
is on a marginal AM as well) asking about how to buy radios and all were
very excited. This, perhaps and even hopefully will rub off on AM.





Is it true that you only started using "Eduardo" in 2000? How does this
use of this name promote your business?

Steve wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

What I'm seeing, is interest in HD-AM by users who are interested in AM
content, and who regularly use AM anyway. But little or no interest in
users who do not regularly use AM. Regardless of the audio quality....if
there is no interest in the programming, there will be little interest in
how good it may or may not sound.

Viscious circle there... until there is an audio quality that under-45's can
tolerate, there will be no programming. And as the clock ticks, the band
dies.

The only potential uptick I see is in those auto systems where HD is
included as a standard feature. Sampling of HD, at that point, would be a
natural extension of radio sampling in general...playing with a new radio
in a new car is fairly commonplace. See what it sounds like, on both
bands...even if only to set the presets...there's still sampling going on.
In that context, HD may get a fair hearing, and perhaps some encouraging
acceptance.

That is exactly what will be the make-or-break as to AM. FM is healthy. It
will become healthier with HD 2 channels. It can potentially drage AM back
into the game. This is why none of the big operators has sold a viable AM in
years... all believe the value will be enhanced by HD. That is a
many-billion-dollar gamble.

So, as with most radio techological innovations, it's going to have to be
in the cars in order to expose that captive audience to a fair hearing of
HD-AM for an interest to be generated. (This, despite the fact that a
majority of listening is not in cars.) But for those listeners who would
have to actively pursue an HD experience without current regular AM
usage...I'm not seeing it.

Cars are where Americans are forced to get a new radio. Obviously, there is
a trickle down aspect, as not everyone buys new cars (ever) and not everyone
buys a new car every year or two. But this is the opportunity for AM. It is
not an overnighter, but the band is fading, not exploding.

So far, you've been talking about how the stations love HD-AM. You and
I know that the success of any radio station is found in listener centric
product and behaviour. The point that radio stations love HD-AM is
unimportant. It's the listener's embrace that matters. And outside of
controlled demostrations, there is nothing to suggest that there is more
interest in HD-AM than in C-Quam. And the jury will be out for some time
to come.

We are years away from being able to evaluate listener response, which will
be based on product demand. But the few reports that have started coming in
are favorable. On the FM side, we put a Tejano format on last week ont he
KLTN HD2 channel, and we have registered several hundred calls (the format
is on a marginal AM as well) asking about how to buy radios and all were
very excited. This, perhaps and even hopefully will rub off on AM.





Is it true that you only started using "Eduardo" in 2000? How does this
use of this name promote your business?

It's true! Right about that time he ceased being David_Gleason and became David
Eduardo on the net.

Now he claims to have been baptized 'Eduardo' in 1947, up in Cleveland, Ohio. He
was born David Frackelton Gleason in 1946.

One wonders why, when he spent so much time in Mexico, Ecuador, San Juan, etc., he
did not use the 'Eduardo' shtick at that time? He had business cards printed,
signed letters to listeners, was on HCJB, had his name in radio publications, both
professional and hobby (most often appearing as David Gleason and at times as
David F. Gleason) and NEVER once does the name 'Eduardo' ever come up.

If one looks at his resume page, one very telling item is his mothers death notice
which appears to be dated 1997 which lists her survivors as:

Carolyn G. Oberndorf, David Gleason, H. Lansing Vail, Thomas V. H. Vail, Jane
Vaughn and Stanton K. Gleason.

Wonder why David didn't at least get an F. tossed in there, let alone an E. F.?
At least his stepbrother got the V. H. put in.

Bottom line, he certainly is a Frackelton, but he sure as hell isn't an 'Eduardo',
at least until right around the year 2000 when he adopted that shtick, apparently
right around the time he discovered that he could check off a box on the Census
form and become an instant Hispanic.

Most likely somehow all related to his business activities.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

dxAce wrote:
Steve wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

What I'm seeing, is interest in HD-AM by users who are interested in AM
content, and who regularly use AM anyway. But little or no interest in
users who do not regularly use AM. Regardless of the audio quality....if
there is no interest in the programming, there will be little interest in
how good it may or may not sound.

Viscious circle there... until there is an audio quality that under-45's can
tolerate, there will be no programming. And as the clock ticks, the band
dies.

The only potential uptick I see is in those auto systems where HD is
included as a standard feature. Sampling of HD, at that point, would be a
natural extension of radio sampling in general...playing with a new radio
in a new car is fairly commonplace. See what it sounds like, on both
bands...even if only to set the presets...there's still sampling going on.
In that context, HD may get a fair hearing, and perhaps some encouraging
acceptance.

That is exactly what will be the make-or-break as to AM. FM is healthy. It
will become healthier with HD 2 channels. It can potentially drage AM back
into the game. This is why none of the big operators has sold a viable AM in
years... all believe the value will be enhanced by HD. That is a
many-billion-dollar gamble.

So, as with most radio techological innovations, it's going to have to be
in the cars in order to expose that captive audience to a fair hearing of
HD-AM for an interest to be generated. (This, despite the fact that a
majority of listening is not in cars.) But for those listeners who would
have to actively pursue an HD experience without current regular AM
usage...I'm not seeing it.

Cars are where Americans are forced to get a new radio. Obviously, there is
a trickle down aspect, as not everyone buys new cars (ever) and not everyone
buys a new car every year or two. But this is the opportunity for AM. It is
not an overnighter, but the band is fading, not exploding.

So far, you've been talking about how the stations love HD-AM. You and
I know that the success of any radio station is found in listener centric
product and behaviour. The point that radio stations love HD-AM is
unimportant. It's the listener's embrace that matters. And outside of
controlled demostrations, there is nothing to suggest that there is more
interest in HD-AM than in C-Quam. And the jury will be out for some time
to come.

We are years away from being able to evaluate listener response, which will
be based on product demand. But the few reports that have started coming in
are favorable. On the FM side, we put a Tejano format on last week ont he
KLTN HD2 channel, and we have registered several hundred calls (the format
is on a marginal AM as well) asking about how to buy radios and all were
very excited. This, perhaps and even hopefully will rub off on AM.





Is it true that you only started using "Eduardo" in 2000? How does this
use of this name promote your business?

It's true! Right about that time he ceased being David_Gleason and became David
Eduardo on the net.

Now he claims to have been baptized 'Eduardo' in 1947, up in Cleveland, Ohio. He
was born David Frackelton Gleason in 1946.

One wonders why, when he spent so much time in Mexico, Ecuador, San Juan, etc., he
did not use the 'Eduardo' shtick at that time? He had business cards printed,
signed letters to listeners, was on HCJB, had his name in radio publications, both
professional and hobby (most often appearing as David Gleason and at times as
David F. Gleason) and NEVER once does the name 'Eduardo' ever come up.

If one looks at his resume page, one very telling item is his mothers death notice
which appears to be dated 1997 which lists her survivors as:

Carolyn G. Oberndorf, David Gleason, H. Lansing Vail, Thomas V. H. Vail, Jane
Vaughn and Stanton K. Gleason.

Wonder why David didn't at least get an F. tossed in there, let alone an E. F.?
At least his stepbrother got the V. H. put in.

Bottom line, he certainly is a Frackelton, but he sure as hell isn't an 'Eduardo',
at least until right around the year 2000 when he adopted that shtick, apparently
right around the time he discovered that he could check off a box on the Census
form and become an instant Hispanic.

Most likely somehow all related to his business activities.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

It's also interesting that, on his website, Tardo represents himself as
"Executive Vice President of Univision Radio's research and programming
division". However, if you look at the page promoting the NAB
conference in San Diego in 2004

http://tinyurl.com/rzgea

he's "president of programming at Univision Radio". Either Tardo was
demoted since 2004 or he isn't able to keep his story straight.
Interesting.

"Steve" wrote in message
oups.com...


It's also interesting that, on his website, Tardo represents himself as
"Executive Vice President of Univision Radio's research and programming
division". However, if you look at the page promoting the NAB
conference in San Diego in 2004

http://tinyurl.com/rzgea

he's "president of programming at Univision Radio". Either Tardo was
demoted since 2004 or he isn't able to keep his story straight.
Interesting.

NAB made a mistake. So what? At the time, I was VP Programming. Now I am
EVP. Simple.

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


It's also interesting that, on his website, Tardo represents himself as
"Executive Vice President of Univision Radio's research and programming
division". However, if you look at the page promoting the NAB
conference in San Diego in 2004

http://tinyurl.com/rzgea

he's "president of programming at Univision Radio". Either Tardo was
demoted since 2004 or he isn't able to keep his story straight.
Interesting.

NAB made a mistake. So what? At the time, I was VP Programming. Now I am
EVP. Simple.

Sure it is....sure. NAB didn't make a mistake. You made a mistake by
getting caught in another lie.

Steve wrote:

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


It's also interesting that, on his website, Tardo represents himself as
"Executive Vice President of Univision Radio's research and programming
division". However, if you look at the page promoting the NAB
conference in San Diego in 2004

http://tinyurl.com/rzgea

he's "president of programming at Univision Radio". Either Tardo was
demoted since 2004 or he isn't able to keep his story straight.
Interesting.

NAB made a mistake. So what? At the time, I was VP Programming. Now I am
EVP. Simple.

Sure it is....sure. NAB didn't make a mistake. You made a mistake by
getting caught in another lie.

As I've said before, it's always somebody else making mistakes, somebody else
confusing dates, etc., etc., etc. with Edfraudo.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Steve wrote:

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


It's also interesting that, on his website, Tardo represents himself
as
"Executive Vice President of Univision Radio's research and
programming
division". However, if you look at the page promoting the NAB
conference in San Diego in 2004

http://tinyurl.com/rzgea

he's "president of programming at Univision Radio". Either Tardo was
demoted since 2004 or he isn't able to keep his story straight.
Interesting.

NAB made a mistake. So what? At the time, I was VP Programming. Now I
am
EVP. Simple.

Sure it is....sure. NAB didn't make a mistake. You made a mistake by
getting caught in another lie.

As I've said before, it's always somebody else making mistakes, somebody
else
confusing dates, etc., etc., etc. with Edfraudo.

That one is pretty obvious. No broadcaster has a president of programming.
The President is the COO or CEO, only. There are not two presidents.

"Steve" wrote in message
ups.com...

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


It's also interesting that, on his website, Tardo represents himself as
"Executive Vice President of Univision Radio's research and programming
division". However, if you look at the page promoting the NAB
conference in San Diego in 2004

http://tinyurl.com/rzgea

he's "president of programming at Univision Radio". Either Tardo was
demoted since 2004 or he isn't able to keep his story straight.
Interesting.

NAB made a mistake. So what? At the time, I was VP Programming. Now I am
EVP. Simple.

Sure it is....sure. NAB didn't make a mistake. You made a mistake by
getting caught in another lie.

Each company has only one President. Nobody has a "President of Programming.
" None. It was simply an error. The NAB program each year has dozens of
similar inoffensive errors, like wrong titles or misspelled names or wrong
call letters.

David Eduardo wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message
ups.com...

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


It's also interesting that, on his website, Tardo represents himself as
"Executive Vice President of Univision Radio's research and programming
division". However, if you look at the page promoting the NAB
conference in San Diego in 2004

http://tinyurl.com/rzgea

he's "president of programming at Univision Radio". Either Tardo was
demoted since 2004 or he isn't able to keep his story straight.
Interesting.

NAB made a mistake. So what? At the time, I was VP Programming. Now I am
EVP. Simple.

Sure it is....sure. NAB didn't make a mistake. You made a mistake by
getting caught in another lie.

Each company has only one President. Nobody has a "President of Programming.
" None. It was simply an error. The NAB program each year has dozens of
similar inoffensive errors, like wrong titles or misspelled names or wrong
call letters.

BUSTED

dxAce wrote:
Steve wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

What I'm seeing, is interest in HD-AM by users who are interested in AM
content, and who regularly use AM anyway. But little or no interest in
users who do not regularly use AM. Regardless of the audio quality....if
there is no interest in the programming, there will be little interest in
how good it may or may not sound.

Viscious circle there... until there is an audio quality that under-45's can
tolerate, there will be no programming. And as the clock ticks, the band
dies.

The only potential uptick I see is in those auto systems where HD is
included as a standard feature. Sampling of HD, at that point, would be a
natural extension of radio sampling in general...playing with a new radio
in a new car is fairly commonplace. See what it sounds like, on both
bands...even if only to set the presets...there's still sampling going on.
In that context, HD may get a fair hearing, and perhaps some encouraging
acceptance.

That is exactly what will be the make-or-break as to AM. FM is healthy. It
will become healthier with HD 2 channels. It can potentially drage AM back
into the game. This is why none of the big operators has sold a viable AM in
years... all believe the value will be enhanced by HD. That is a
many-billion-dollar gamble.

So, as with most radio techological innovations, it's going to have to be
in the cars in order to expose that captive audience to a fair hearing of
HD-AM for an interest to be generated. (This, despite the fact that a
majority of listening is not in cars.) But for those listeners who would
have to actively pursue an HD experience without current regular AM
usage...I'm not seeing it.

Cars are where Americans are forced to get a new radio. Obviously, there is
a trickle down aspect, as not everyone buys new cars (ever) and not everyone
buys a new car every year or two. But this is the opportunity for AM. It is
not an overnighter, but the band is fading, not exploding.

So far, you've been talking about how the stations love HD-AM. You and
I know that the success of any radio station is found in listener centric
product and behaviour. The point that radio stations love HD-AM is
unimportant. It's the listener's embrace that matters. And outside of
controlled demostrations, there is nothing to suggest that there is more
interest in HD-AM than in C-Quam. And the jury will be out for some time
to come.

We are years away from being able to evaluate listener response, which will
be based on product demand. But the few reports that have started coming in
are favorable. On the FM side, we put a Tejano format on last week ont he
KLTN HD2 channel, and we have registered several hundred calls (the format
is on a marginal AM as well) asking about how to buy radios and all were
very excited. This, perhaps and even hopefully will rub off on AM.





Is it true that you only started using "Eduardo" in 2000? How does this
use of this name promote your business?

It's true! Right about that time he ceased being David_Gleason and became David
Eduardo on the net.

Now he claims to have been baptized 'Eduardo' in 1947, up in Cleveland, Ohio. He
was born David Frackelton Gleason in 1946.

One wonders why, when he spent so much time in Mexico, Ecuador, San Juan, etc., he
did not use the 'Eduardo' shtick at that time? He had business cards printed,
signed letters to listeners, was on HCJB, had his name in radio publications, both
professional and hobby (most often appearing as David Gleason and at times as
David F. Gleason) and NEVER once does the name 'Eduardo' ever come up.

If one looks at his resume page, one very telling item is his mothers death notice
which appears to be dated 1997 which lists her survivors as:

Carolyn G. Oberndorf, David Gleason, H. Lansing Vail, Thomas V. H. Vail, Jane
Vaughn and Stanton K. Gleason.

Wonder why David didn't at least get an F. tossed in there, let alone an E. F.?
At least his stepbrother got the V. H. put in.

Bottom line, he certainly is a Frackelton, but he sure as hell isn't an 'Eduardo',
at least until right around the year 2000 when he adopted that shtick, apparently
right around the time he discovered that he could check off a box on the Census
form and become an instant Hispanic.

Most likely somehow all related to his business activities.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

It doesn't get much lamer than that.

Steve