http://jacobsmedia.typepad.com/jacobs/2007/12/hd-radios-new-1.html
I would love to see HD Radio work. I really would.
But in order to "break" a new medium/gadget in this new millennium, it's going to take clever tactics, brilliant strategy, and on-target execution. These are qualities that have been in short supply since the Alliance was formed. Another Christmas comes and goes, and the celebration over a half million radios sold is about as meaningless as a big defensive lineman celebrating after a sack in a game his team is losing by five touchdowns.
Friday, December 28, 2007
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Declare Victory and Pull Out of HD Radio
http://insidemusicmedia.blogspot.com/2007/12/declare-victory-and-pull-out-of-hd.html
Radio executives are not dumb.
They may be arrogant enough to think their old business model will work in the future, but as the pain of declining audiences and revenue proliferates they’ll even deal with that.
So why, you ask, is the industry so secretive, silent and shameful when it comes to HD radio?
It’s a flop by any measurement.
Radio executives are not dumb.
They may be arrogant enough to think their old business model will work in the future, but as the pain of declining audiences and revenue proliferates they’ll even deal with that.
So why, you ask, is the industry so secretive, silent and shameful when it comes to HD radio?
It’s a flop by any measurement.
8 N ‘08 4 HD
http://www.paragonmediastrategies.com/theblog/?cat=3
Yes…The Hazy Dust is clearing now. There they are — The Eight You-Saw-Them-Here-First Predictions For HD Radio in 2008:
1. Desperate for share-of-mind, HD Radios will be given away for free. Think cell phones, book & music clubs, AOL discs, and 0% auto financing. (but, will people want them?)
2. HD Radio will travel two forks in the road: Public and Talk Radio will lead with innovative programming on their HD-2 channels; HD taking the early steps toward becoming a new Information “band.” Simultaneously, HD-2 music channels will become the new Muzak, but very localized. Most sales will come from in-business fees and other non-conventional sponsorships.
3. Many stations won’t waste their time with HD-2 sub-brands, concentrating, instead, on promoting the advantages for their main, HD-1, Digital signal only.
4. A Democrat winning the White House in ’08 will ignite a creative opportunity for a new breed of Political Talk on HD-2’s, the second channel becoming a problem-solver, not an albatross.
5. If the number of sets grow, after-market applications will begin sneaking forward (a more logical and listener-friendly dial, grouping similar formats together, Cable-like interfaces, integration with Microsoft’s in-car Sync, etc.). That is a mighty big “IF.”
6. Equipment makers will put Radio on notice – Higher awareness of HD, better content, a heartbeat on the sales charts or HD Radio production lines will be shut down.
7. Ordering HD Radio as an equipment option in new cars will be a bust (see #1) . Moon roof or HD Radio? No brainer.
8. Two, perhaps three, major Radio groups will break away from the Alliance citing their desire to produce more relevant, ingenious, and compelling product than Alliance membership allows.
My Crystal Ball goes dark and blank when I look for HD Radio beyond 2008. Very dark. Very blank.
Yes…The Hazy Dust is clearing now. There they are — The Eight You-Saw-Them-Here-First Predictions For HD Radio in 2008:
1. Desperate for share-of-mind, HD Radios will be given away for free. Think cell phones, book & music clubs, AOL discs, and 0% auto financing. (but, will people want them?)
2. HD Radio will travel two forks in the road: Public and Talk Radio will lead with innovative programming on their HD-2 channels; HD taking the early steps toward becoming a new Information “band.” Simultaneously, HD-2 music channels will become the new Muzak, but very localized. Most sales will come from in-business fees and other non-conventional sponsorships.
3. Many stations won’t waste their time with HD-2 sub-brands, concentrating, instead, on promoting the advantages for their main, HD-1, Digital signal only.
4. A Democrat winning the White House in ’08 will ignite a creative opportunity for a new breed of Political Talk on HD-2’s, the second channel becoming a problem-solver, not an albatross.
5. If the number of sets grow, after-market applications will begin sneaking forward (a more logical and listener-friendly dial, grouping similar formats together, Cable-like interfaces, integration with Microsoft’s in-car Sync, etc.). That is a mighty big “IF.”
6. Equipment makers will put Radio on notice – Higher awareness of HD, better content, a heartbeat on the sales charts or HD Radio production lines will be shut down.
7. Ordering HD Radio as an equipment option in new cars will be a bust (see #1) . Moon roof or HD Radio? No brainer.
8. Two, perhaps three, major Radio groups will break away from the Alliance citing their desire to produce more relevant, ingenious, and compelling product than Alliance membership allows.
My Crystal Ball goes dark and blank when I look for HD Radio beyond 2008. Very dark. Very blank.
HOW TO COMPLAIN TO THE FCC AND INTERFERING STATIONS
http://www.stopiboc.com/howtocomplain.html
For station operators receiving harmful IBOC interference:
Don't be fatalistic.
DO NOT accept harmful interference as inevitable conesequences of the NAB's misfeasance and the political power of Big Group Radio. GET AN INTERFERENCE COMPLAINT ON FILE with the FCC. Get started on it right away! There IS something you can do to protect you, your employees, your listeners and your investment in your radio station!
For listeners and members of the general public:
You can submit FCC complaints through the Federal Communications Commission website, www.fcc.gov. While this "doesn't hurt," understand that the Commission doesn't accord a lot of weight to technical complaints filed by the general public…at least not until the number of complaints reach "a critical mass" and start to get the attention of the Mass Media Bureau and politicians close to the FCC.
IBOC-AM hasn't gotten there yet. But, given the abysmal performance of the system in the field, it's only a matter of time. So your complaint can help move this along.
For station operators receiving harmful IBOC interference:
Don't be fatalistic.
DO NOT accept harmful interference as inevitable conesequences of the NAB's misfeasance and the political power of Big Group Radio. GET AN INTERFERENCE COMPLAINT ON FILE with the FCC. Get started on it right away! There IS something you can do to protect you, your employees, your listeners and your investment in your radio station!
For listeners and members of the general public:
You can submit FCC complaints through the Federal Communications Commission website, www.fcc.gov. While this "doesn't hurt," understand that the Commission doesn't accord a lot of weight to technical complaints filed by the general public…at least not until the number of complaints reach "a critical mass" and start to get the attention of the Mass Media Bureau and politicians close to the FCC.
IBOC-AM hasn't gotten there yet. But, given the abysmal performance of the system in the field, it's only a matter of time. So your complaint can help move this along.
Another View: Hey, AM HD-R Critics: Got a Better Idea?
http://www.rwonline.com/pages/s.0044/t.10299.html
Naysayers Should Offer a Cost-Effective, Feasible Alternative or Put a Cork in It
by Stephen Poole, 12.19.2007
Stephen Poole is market chief engineer for Crawford Broadcasting Co., Birmingham, Ala., and a contributor to Radio World. Opinions are his own.
As a market chief engineer who has installed HD-R systems on two AMs and three FMs, I’d like to throw in my own two cents’ worth. In particular, I want to address the negative comments that have been made about AM HD-R in this magazine. The following are my own opinions and observations, not necessarily those of my employer.
My biggest complaint about the complainers — i.e., those who want to dismiss AM HD-R — is that they propose no real, feasible and realistic alternative. You get the impression that these naysayers want to keep AM as it is, in spite of its many problems and the precipitous decline in listenership in recent decades.
Okay, suppose they get their way: If the decline continues, the day will come when the manufacturers just stop building AM radios due to lack of demand. What will they do then?
Naysayers Should Offer a Cost-Effective, Feasible Alternative or Put a Cork in It
by Stephen Poole, 12.19.2007
Stephen Poole is market chief engineer for Crawford Broadcasting Co., Birmingham, Ala., and a contributor to Radio World. Opinions are his own.
As a market chief engineer who has installed HD-R systems on two AMs and three FMs, I’d like to throw in my own two cents’ worth. In particular, I want to address the negative comments that have been made about AM HD-R in this magazine. The following are my own opinions and observations, not necessarily those of my employer.
My biggest complaint about the complainers — i.e., those who want to dismiss AM HD-R — is that they propose no real, feasible and realistic alternative. You get the impression that these naysayers want to keep AM as it is, in spite of its many problems and the precipitous decline in listenership in recent decades.
Okay, suppose they get their way: If the decline continues, the day will come when the manufacturers just stop building AM radios due to lack of demand. What will they do then?
2007, A Year to Remember
http://www.rwonline.com/pages/s.0054/t.10297.html
Probably topping the list was the release of long-anticipated “final rules” for IBOC, with the FCC’s Second Report and Order on DAB, adopted in March (although not effective until Sept. 15).
Among other things, this made it possible for broadcasters to begin FM IBOC multicasting and Extended Hybrid operation without permission or notice. It also allowed AM IBOC broadcasting at night — a topic that has subsequently proven quite controversial, resulting in numerous complaints, the formation of an anti-IBOC coalition, and one radio group’s (Citadel’s) at least temporary cessation of AM IBOC operation. This debate will undoubtedly continue in 2008.
There were other, more positive IBOC-related movements in the industry during 2007, which you may recall from their in-depth coverage on these pages, and which will likely reappear in more real form in 2008.
Probably topping the list was the release of long-anticipated “final rules” for IBOC, with the FCC’s Second Report and Order on DAB, adopted in March (although not effective until Sept. 15).
Among other things, this made it possible for broadcasters to begin FM IBOC multicasting and Extended Hybrid operation without permission or notice. It also allowed AM IBOC broadcasting at night — a topic that has subsequently proven quite controversial, resulting in numerous complaints, the formation of an anti-IBOC coalition, and one radio group’s (Citadel’s) at least temporary cessation of AM IBOC operation. This debate will undoubtedly continue in 2008.
There were other, more positive IBOC-related movements in the industry during 2007, which you may recall from their in-depth coverage on these pages, and which will likely reappear in more real form in 2008.
NAB Digital Radio Committee to Discuss AM Nighttime IBOC in January
http://www.rwonline.com/leslie_report/
The IBOC at night question is on the NAB radar, though. Association officials will be discussing the AM interference question next month.
In his letter to Bob Savage, Rehr continued: “In respect to NAB’s history regarding In-Band On-Channel radio (IBOC), the association has proceeded cautiously over many years with active participation by a broad cross-section of our membership to achieve consensus positions as well as our work with all-industry organizations such as the National Radio Systems Committee.
“Currently, we have an upcoming NAB Digital Radio Committee meeting scheduled in January where we will review input on nighttime AM IBOC and other related issues.”
I’m glad to see NAB planning to talk about nighttime AM IBOC in this committee. A wise engineer suggested to me this week that perhaps the best way to approach this WYSL-WBZ debate is for an independent third party to conduct an engineering study to figure out what’s going on. This could help settle whether what is happening is specifically due to IBOC, or AM atmospheric conditions, or something else.
And, of course, determining who would pay for such a study would be the next step.
The IBOC at night question is on the NAB radar, though. Association officials will be discussing the AM interference question next month.
In his letter to Bob Savage, Rehr continued: “In respect to NAB’s history regarding In-Band On-Channel radio (IBOC), the association has proceeded cautiously over many years with active participation by a broad cross-section of our membership to achieve consensus positions as well as our work with all-industry organizations such as the National Radio Systems Committee.
“Currently, we have an upcoming NAB Digital Radio Committee meeting scheduled in January where we will review input on nighttime AM IBOC and other related issues.”
I’m glad to see NAB planning to talk about nighttime AM IBOC in this committee. A wise engineer suggested to me this week that perhaps the best way to approach this WYSL-WBZ debate is for an independent third party to conduct an engineering study to figure out what’s going on. This could help settle whether what is happening is specifically due to IBOC, or AM atmospheric conditions, or something else.
And, of course, determining who would pay for such a study would be the next step.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
