|
HD Radio to charge consumers for content !
"If HD Radio Charges Consumers, Will It Be Considered Competition For
Satellite Radio?" http://satellitestandard.blogspot.co...s-will-it.html Notable quote: "It is pretty much confirmed that HD Radio is going to charge consumers for content. At what point is the FCC going to consider this service competition for satellite radio? Ironically, free HD is not considered competition, but paid service would be!" Yup, it's a given - looks like the HD Radio Alliance has finally realized that HD Radio is not going to be terrestrial radio's great savior, so they have now taken a backseat to Satellite Radio, forever. Great news ! |
HD Radio to charge consumers for content !
wrote in message oups.com... "If HD Radio Charges Consumers, Will It Be Considered Competition For Satellite Radio?" http://satellitestandard.blogspot.co...s-will-it.html Notable quote: "It is pretty much confirmed that HD Radio is going to charge consumers for content. At what point is the FCC going to consider this service competition for satellite radio? Ironically, free HD is not considered competition, but paid service would be!" It is not confirmed. In fact, no broadcaster I know has any intention of doing this, as there is no model for charging for single channels or 3 to 4 unrealted channels when XM and Sirius have around 150 each. Yup, it's a given - looks like the HD Radio Alliance has finally realized that HD Radio is not going to be terrestrial radio's great savior, so they have now taken a backseat to Satellite Radio, forever. Great news ! There is no news of this whatsoever. |
HD Radio to charge consumers for content !
On Mar 30, 1:57�pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
wrote in message oups.com... "If HD Radio Charges Consumers, Will It Be Considered Competition For Satellite Radio?" http://satellitestandard.blogspot.co...io-charges-con... Notable quote: "It is pretty much confirmed that HD Radio is going to charge consumers for content. At what point is the FCC going to consider this service competition for satellite radio? Ironically, free HD is not considered competition, but paid service would be!" It is not confirmed. In fact, no broadcaster I know has any intention of doing this, as there is no model for charging for single channels or 3 to 4 unrealted channels when XM and Sirius have around 150 each. Yup, it's a given - looks like the HD Radio Alliance has finally realized that HD Radio is not going to be terrestrial radio's great savior, so they have now taken a backseat to Satellite Radio, forever. *Great news ! There is no news of this whatsoever. Yea, your are rigtht and RWOnline is wrong: "Is Pay-for-Play HD Content on Horizon?" "For more than a year, Ibiquity officials have been working with NDS, a technology contractor, to develop a conditional access feature for HD Radio. With field testing underway at a Florida public station, some proponents hope conditional access is the next big feature for HD Radio and think receivers that can handle the capability may be available by the end of the year. Much must happen to make that a reality." http://www.rwonline.com/pages/s.0049/t.4028.html It won't be up to individual broadcasters. As I said, HD Radio is failing and this is the only way to attempt to recoup the huge losses, due to the failed $500,000,000 HD Radio Alliance ad campaign. As Ramsey said, "it will be a long, slow race to the bottom": "Sirius, XM, and HD: Consumer interest reality check" "While interest in satellite radio is diminishing, interest in HD shows no signs of a pulse." http://www.hear2.com/2007/02/sirius_xm_and_h.html |
HD Radio to charge consumers for content !
On Mar 30, 1:57�pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
wrote in message oups.com... "If HD Radio Charges Consumers, Will It Be Considered Competition For Satellite Radio?" http://satellitestandard.blogspot.co...io-charges-con... Notable quote: "It is pretty much confirmed that HD Radio is going to charge consumers for content. At what point is the FCC going to consider this service competition for satellite radio? Ironically, free HD is not considered competition, but paid service would be!" It is not confirmed. In fact, no broadcaster I know has any intention of doing this, as there is no model for charging for single channels or 3 to 4 unrealted channels when XM and Sirius have around 150 each. Yup, it's a given - looks like the HD Radio Alliance has finally realized that HD Radio is not going to be terrestrial radio's great savior, so they have now taken a backseat to Satellite Radio, forever. *Great news ! There is no news of this whatsoever. "WUSF Testing Conditional Access" http://rwonline.com/pages/s.0049/t.4029.html Notable quote: "WUSF(FM) in Tampa, a long-time IBOC test bed and the first public station to go IBOC, is the site of conditional access field testing for HD Radio this spring. Tests were to begin March 19 and continue through early May, according to Tom Dollenmayer, station manager for radio and TV, WUSF Public Broadcasting." Oh sorry, I seemed to have missed this article from Radio World Online. |
HD Radio to charge consumers for content !
wrote in message ups.com... On Mar 30, 1:57?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote: wrote in message oups.com... "If HD Radio Charges Consumers, Will It Be Considered Competition For Satellite Radio?" http://satellitestandard.blogspot.co...io-charges-con... Notable quote: "It is pretty much confirmed that HD Radio is going to charge consumers for content. At what point is the FCC going to consider this service competition for satellite radio? Ironically, free HD is not considered competition, but paid service would be!" It is not confirmed. In fact, no broadcaster I know has any intention of doing this, as there is no model for charging for single channels or 3 to 4 unrealted channels when XM and Sirius have around 150 each. Yup, it's a given - looks like the HD Radio Alliance has finally realized that HD Radio is not going to be terrestrial radio's great savior, so they have now taken a backseat to Satellite Radio, forever. Great news ! There is no news of this whatsoever. "WUSF Testing Conditional Access" This is a test by a public station, and there is so far no interest on the part of commercial stations... the other issue is that there is absolutely no economic model for charging for single channels at the local level. |
HD Radio to charge consumers for content !
On Mar 30, 4:05?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
wrote in message ups.com... On Mar 30, 1:57?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote: wrote in message roups.com... "If HD Radio Charges Consumers, Will It Be Considered Competition For Satellite Radio?" http://satellitestandard.blogspot.co...io-charges-con... Notable quote: "It is pretty much confirmed that HD Radio is going to charge consumers for content. At what point is the FCC going to consider this service competition for satellite radio? Ironically, free HD is not considered competition, but paid service would be!" It is not confirmed. In fact, no broadcaster I know has any intention of doing this, as there is no model for charging for single channels or 3 to 4 unrealted channels when XM and Sirius have around 150 each. Yup, it's a given - looks like the HD Radio Alliance has finally realized that HD Radio is not going to be terrestrial radio's great savior, so they have now taken a backseat to Satellite Radio, forever. Great news ! There is no news of this whatsoever. "WUSF Testing Conditional Access" This is a test by a public station, and there is so far no interest on the part of commercial stations... the other issue is that there is absolutely no economic model for charging for single channels at the local level.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Doesn't matter what you say, because all of this is negative publicity for HD Radio on a national level - LOL !!! BAWAHAAA !!! |
MORE ANALog Ideolog Propaganda
On Mar 30, 5:25?pm, "HD Radio?" wrote:
AGENDA On the Government's dole no girlfriend, no wife, no kids, just a mouth full of profanity from America Online nearManassas, VA wrote in message oups.com "I have been researching/posting on this subject for a year, and have a zillion links set up, and know exactly how and where to find information, to counter little punks like you and David Edurado" wrote in message ups.com... Good cocksucker, I ****ed you off. wrote in message oups.com... Dumb **** Guerite HD/IBOC Shill -- amazing how much time you have to waste in your small adolescent mind -- Glad, that you are impressed - is that all you got, buddy ? |
MORE ANALog Ideolog Propaganda
|
MORE ANALog Ideolog Propaganda
On Mar 30, 5:25?pm, "HD Radio?" wrote:
AGENDA On the Government's dole no girlfriend, no wife, no kids, just a mouth full of profanity from America Online nearManassas, VA wrote in message oups.com "I have been researching/posting on this subject for a year, and have a zillion links set up, and know exactly how and where to find information, to counter little punks like you and David Edurado" wrote in message ups.com... Good cocksucker, I ****ed you off. wrote in message oups.com... Dumb **** Guerite HD/IBOC Shill -- amazing how much time you have to waste in your small adolescent mind -- Personal attcks, such as this, just mean that I have won the HD Radio War ! BAWAHAAAAA ! |
HD Radio to charge consumers for content !
On Mar 30, 4:05?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
wrote in message ups.com... On Mar 30, 1:57?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote: wrote in message roups.com... "If HD Radio Charges Consumers, Will It Be Considered Competition For Satellite Radio?" http://satellitestandard.blogspot.co...io-charges-con... Notable quote: "It is pretty much confirmed that HD Radio is going to charge consumers for content. At what point is the FCC going to consider this service competition for satellite radio? Ironically, free HD is not considered competition, but paid service would be!" It is not confirmed. In fact, no broadcaster I know has any intention of doing this, as there is no model for charging for single channels or 3 to 4 unrealted channels when XM and Sirius have around 150 each. Yup, it's a given - looks like the HD Radio Alliance has finally realized that HD Radio is not going to be terrestrial radio's great savior, so they have now taken a backseat to Satellite Radio, forever. Great news ! There is no news of this whatsoever. "WUSF Testing Conditional Access" This is a test by a public station, and there is so far no interest on the part of commercial stations... the other issue is that there is absolutely no economic model for charging for single channels at the local level.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Doesn't matter what you post on this, and radioinfo's little-read message boards. What does matter, is negative publicity for HD Radio on a national level, and that is exactly what is happening. Even if you were right, which I highly-doubt, just the thought of HD Radio charging for content puts it smack behind Satellite Radio, forever - just having these articles on RWOnline is enough, and they will be picked up and spread across the Web - you are, ****-out-of-luck ! BAWAHAAA !!! |
HD Radio to charge consumers for content !
David Eduardo wrote:
wrote in message ups.com... On Mar 30, 1:57?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote: wrote in message oups.com... "If HD Radio Charges Consumers, Will It Be Considered Competition For Satellite Radio?" http://satellitestandard.blogspot.co...io-charges-con... Notable quote: "It is pretty much confirmed that HD Radio is going to charge consumers for content. At what point is the FCC going to consider this service competition for satellite radio? Ironically, free HD is not considered competition, but paid service would be!" It is not confirmed. In fact, no broadcaster I know has any intention of doing this, as there is no model for charging for single channels or 3 to 4 unrealted channels when XM and Sirius have around 150 each. Yup, it's a given - looks like the HD Radio Alliance has finally realized that HD Radio is not going to be terrestrial radio's great savior, so they have now taken a backseat to Satellite Radio, forever. Great news ! There is no news of this whatsoever. "WUSF Testing Conditional Access" This is a test by a public station, and there is so far no interest on the part of commercial stations... the other issue is that there is absolutely no economic model for charging for single channels at the local level. The fact that this matter is being openly discussed in the industry, and the personalities who are doing the discussing, begs to differ with you. There IS interest. Because there's money in it. This has been discussed since before the formation of iBiquity, when digital radio was first being discussed as a possible replacement for AM, back in the late 70's. That no one you speak to is interested may be one thing. But that iBiquity are themselves pursuing the technology and the business model is quite another. And, for the record, saying 'There's no interest, so far....' is like a hostess saying, 'Would you like to sit in the smoking section? There's no one smoking right now." The situation could and will change in a heartbeat. There's money in subscription radio. It's been the holy grail of broadcasting since Sarnoff. There's always been interest. Always. Because there's money in it. And radio in the US is, has been and always will be, about the money. |
HD Radio to charge consumers for content !
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: wrote in message This is a test by a public station, and there is so far no interest on the part of commercial stations... the other issue is that there is absolutely no economic model for charging for single channels at the local level. The fact that this matter is being openly discussed in the industry, and the personalities who are doing the discussing, begs to differ with you. There IS interest. Because there's money in it. There is no money in it because the economics of offering paid HD would be limited to the couple of stations any owner has in a market, and the cost would have to be so low to compete with the cost per channel of satellite. Every examination of this shows that radio neither has the business model nor the ability to do the billing and such to generate a profit. This has been discussed since before the formation of iBiquity, when digital radio was first being discussed as a possible replacement for AM, back in the late 70's. And discarded sort of like On TV. That no one you speak to is interested may be one thing. But that iBiquity are themselves pursuing the technology and the business model is quite another. I can see it being useful if any station wants to degrade the digital stream to permit an HD3 channel for narrowcasting, just like we have Farsi "Radio Teran" on KLVE's SCA. But the subscription requires rental of a special receiver and it is only marginally profitable... although they send engineering a big basket of pistachios and dates every year. And, for the record, saying 'There's no interest, so far....' is like a hostess saying, 'Would you like to sit in the smoking section? There's no one smoking right now." The situation could and will change in a heartbeat. The problem is economics, based on cost per channel and having enough people in each market to support 1 to 5 channel mini-assortments of formats. I believe NPR has the idea of doing this for significant donations, not as a self-sustaining model. There's money in subscription radio. It's been the holy grail of broadcasting since Sarnoff. There's always been interest. Always. Because there's money in it. And radio in the US is, has been and always will be, about the money. There is not the economy of scale, even at Clear Channel, to establish a billing department and subscription administration for this. In other cases, you can not build a viable model based on, let's take my case, 50 FMs in 17 markets when we already have commercial models in development. Sure, it is interesting. But not practical. Even using a fulfillment center would not create a break-even as the subscription base and variety of formats is tooooooo low. |
HD Radio to charge consumers for content !
On Mar 30, 9:13�pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in ... David Eduardo wrote: wrote in message This is a test by a public station, and there is so far no interest on the part of commercial stations... the other issue is that there is absolutely no economic model for charging for single channels at the local level. * The fact that this matter is being openly discussed in the industry, and the personalities who are doing the discussing, begs to differ with you. There IS interest. Because there's money in it. There is no money in it because the economics of offering paid HD would be limited to the couple of stations any owner has in a market, and the cost would have to be so low to compete with the cost per channel of satellite. Every examination of this shows that radio neither has the business model nor the ability to do the billing and such to generate a profit. * This has been discussed since before the formation of iBiquity, when digital radio was first being discussed as a possible replacement for AM, back in the late 70's. And discarded sort of like On TV. * That no one you speak to is interested may be one thing. But that iBiquity are themselves pursuing the technology and the business model is quite another. I can see it being useful if any station wants to degrade the digital stream to permit an HD3 channel for narrowcasting, just like we have Farsi "Radio Teran" on KLVE's SCA. But the subscription requires rental of a special receiver and it is only marginally profitable... although they send engineering a big basket of pistachios and dates every year. * And, for the record, saying 'There's no interest, so far....' is like a hostess saying, 'Would you like to sit in the smoking section? There's no one smoking right now." The situation could and will change in a heartbeat. The problem is economics, based on cost per channel and having enough people in each market to support 1 to 5 channel mini-assortments of formats. I believe NPR has the idea of doing this for significant donations, not as a self-sustaining model. * There's money in subscription radio. It's been the holy grail of broadcasting since Sarnoff. There's always been interest. Always. Because there's money in it. And radio in the US is, has been and always will be, about the money. There is not the economy of scale, even at Clear Channel, to establish a billing department and subscription administration for this. In other cases, you can not build a viable model based on, let's take my case, 50 FMs in 17 markets when we already have commercial models in development. Sure, it is interesting. But not practical. Even using a fulfillment center would not create a break-even as the subscription base and variety of formats is tooooooo low. Doesn't matter what you post on this, and radioinfo's little-read message boards. What does matter, is negative publicity for HD Radio on a national level, and that is exactly what is happening. Even if you were right, which I highly-doubt, just the thought of HD Radio charging for content puts it smack behind Satellite Radio, forever - just having these articles on RWOnline is enough, and they will be picked up and spread across the Web - you are, ****-out-of-luck ! BAWAHAAA !!! Look what got posted on radiointel's home page: "HD Radio Effort Undermined by Weak Tuners in Expensive Radios [read the MP3 Newswire article] [read the Engadget article] Mar 29" http://radiointel.com/ You can kiss any chances of those radio-geeks buying HD radios - with negative HD Radios articles spreading across the Web, you are losing the battle ! We email critical HD Radio articles to HD Radio reporters - the recent Washington Post article mentions adjacent- channel interference that may clobber some AM stations (he's fishing for comments, no doubt, for a follow-on story). The East Bay Express article has been circulated to ten major newspapers that have run HD Radio articles. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:49 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com