| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
March 16th 07, 01:53 PM
posted to rec.radio.shortwave
|
|||
|
|||
why not, Why Not. WHY NOT ! - Leave AM Radio Alone
On Mar 12, 7:17 am, "RHF" wrote:
David Eduardo, OK -if- we look at the last FCC Data for AM and FM Broadcast Radio Station Totals :http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/totals/bt061231.html#START Total AM Radio Stations = 4,754 Total FM Radio Stations = 6,266 Total FM {Educational} PBS/NPR Radio Stations = 2,817 GRAND TOTAL FOR RADIO = 13,837 Why Not - Move about a third of the smaller lower powered AM/MW Radio Stations that serve small {local} Rural Radio Markets to "HD" FM Broadcasting and clear out the AM/MW Band of a lot of the over-crowding and noise. * This would create "Space-and-Distance" within the AM/MW Radio Band for those wider "HD" AM Radio Signals and their Adjacent Channel Digial Noise. Why Not - Expand the FM Band to cover 76 MHz to 88 MHz to create and additional 60 Channels for most of the AM/MW Radio Stations to transition to -and- Clear-Out the AM/MW Band except for about 250 National and Regional Clear Channel AM "HD" Radio Stations. Again -IMHO- You have proven the case for FM "HD" Radio as a Long Term Business Strategy -and- You have shown that AM "HD" Radio is a short term business strategy that at best is only buying time for Corporations to Divest them selves of what will become an every dimishing market while their FM Radio Business is Growing and Expanding. "HD" {Digital-IBOC} AM/MW Radio only makes long term business sense when there are fewer AM/MW Radio Stations that are in-fact Clear Channels and Powerful enough to cover Large Regions of the Country Day-and-Night. This can only happen with a reduction in the number of AM/MW Radio Stations and Greater Separtation : Frequency and Distance between the Radio Stations : 10 kHz and 100 Miles needs to be expanded to 20-30 kHz and 250+ Miles. Why Not a 15KW, 20KW or 25KW "HD" Digital AM/MW Radio Signal which should be as effective as a 50KW Analog Radio Signal for a Radio Station that is Broadcasting on an 'closed' Clear Channel. or better yet - why not, Why Not. WHY NOT ! - - - Leave AM Radio Alone  ) ~ RHF. . . . On Mar 10, 9:24 am, "David Eduardo" wrote: "RHF" wrote in message ups.com... Long Term IBOC FM "HD" Radio would give them : 1 - Better Overall Local Market Signal Coverage 2 - Better Sound Quality and the 'option' for a Second Audio {Data} Channel. 3 - Plus Younger Listener Demographics - - - So . . . Why Waste the Time, Money and Technology on IBOC AM "HD" Radio which as you admit is at best a short term lossing game. There is a real simple reason and that is based on the fact that nearly all broadcast companies are publicly held. Moving a big n/t station to FM and abandoning the AM to a lesser format would require a write-down of the book asset value of the property, which would affect earnings. Bonneville, held by the LDS, can afford to do this kind of dramatic move. Most of the rest will have to slowly move to simulcasts and gradual adjustments in the values of assets, rather than just pulling the lug; HD may offer some alternatives, such as niche music formats, too... it is a hedge play... and for a big AM, not particularly expensive. As an example, changing a 50 kw AM in LA to HD with a brand new transmitter is less than $250,000 in a market where bigger stations typically bill $40 million to $60 million a year.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - The stupidest idea I've heard in ions. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| why not, Why Not. WHY NOT ! - Leave AM Radio Alone | Shortwave | |||
| why not, Why Not. WHY NOT ! - Leave AM Radio Alone | Shortwave | |||
| why not, Why Not. WHY NOT ! - Leave AM Radio Alone | Shortwave | |||
| why not, Why Not. WHY NOT ! - Leave AM Radio Alone | Shortwave | |||
Linear Mode
