• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Can "music radio" as we currently know it survive profitably in a streaming world?

People say the future of radio is streaming. OK, so how will radio survive and be profitable when competing against literally thousands of streams and streamers? Radio's former profitability was based primarily on scarcity, there were only a limited number of frequencies available in a given market. Then Docket 80-90 increased the number of stations and a lot more stations were competing for the same listeners and ad dollars. We all know what happened next.
So now that competition will be 1000X greater, what differentiates 106.7 Lite FM (or insert your favorite station) from any other music stream on the internet and why will listeners seek it out?
 
People say the future of radio is streaming. OK, so how will radio survive and be profitable when competing against literally thousands of streams and streamers? Radio's former profitability was based primarily on scarcity,

That's why music radio "as we know it" is changing. There's only live & local talent where it's profitable.

Scarcity of a signal doesn't matter if people don't own radios. If that's the direction of the marketplace, then radio has to go to devices people have.

As for competing, that's just the reality. It depends on the stations, formats, and companies to find ways to compete.
 
People say the future of radio is streaming. OK, so how will radio survive and be profitable when competing against literally thousands of streams and streamers? Radio's former profitability was based primarily on scarcity,

That's why music radio "as we know it" is changing. There's only live & local talent where it's profitable.

Scarcity of a signal doesn't matter if people don't own radios. If that's the direction of the marketplace, then radio has to go to devices people have.

As for competing, that's just the reality. It depends on the stations, formats, and companies to find ways to compete
 
People say the future of radio is streaming. OK, so how will radio survive and be profitable when competing against literally thousands of streams and streamers? Radio's former profitability was based primarily on scarcity, there were only a limited number of frequencies available in a given market. Then Docket 80-90 increased the number of stations and a lot more stations were competing for the same listeners and ad dollars. We all know what happened next.
So now that competition will be 1000X greater, what differentiates 106.7 Lite FM (or insert your favorite station) from any other music stream on the internet and why will listeners seek it out?

Keep in mind that streaming has additional costs that don't apply to over-the-air broadcasting. The primary cost is the per-song-per-listener fee required by the DMCA and supported by the recording industry. I expect that to only rise in the future. What Internet-only streamers have done to counteract this is to limit the total number of people who can listen to their streams at any given time. Over-the-air broadcasters have done the same with their Internet streams too, but some, particularly smaller outfits, have taken the additional step of geofencing their streams to the local markets served by the over-the-air broadcast stations in hopes of avoiding the DMCA streaming fees altogether. (The largest radio operators haven't done this yet, probably because they know that if they did, the recording industry would take the radio industry to court and would probably win the case since there is *no* allowance for geofencing inside the DMCA in order to avoid paying copyright fees to the music industry and its artists.) For all of these reasons, I fully expect over-the-air music broadcasters to keep their assigned frequencies as long as they can and then move to a limitation of the total number of people who can listen to their individual stations' streams at any given time (if they haven't done so already).
 
(The largest radio operators haven't done this yet, probably because they know that if they did, the recording industry would take the radio industry to court and would probably win the case since there is *no* allowance for geofencing inside the DMCA in order to avoid paying copyright fees to the music industry and its artists.)
I thought geofencing was used due to international rights issues. Or attempt anyway. Geofencing doesn't work. There has never been a station I've not been able to listen to by either switching to a different app, VPN or both. The anomaly being BBC Sounds and that simply required getting it from outside the Play Store.
 
I thought geofencing was used due to international rights issues. Or attempt anyway. Geofencing doesn't work. There has never been a station I've not been able to listen to by either switching to a different app, VPN or both. The anomaly being BBC Sounds and that simply required getting it from outside the Play Store.

Two points:

1) Geofencing can be done for any given area you want. For example, the Curtis Media Group geofences most of its music outlets to eastern North Carolina.
2) You're right about the technical issues. If you know your technology and specifically how to change your computer's API (is that right?) address, then you can render most geofencing efforts to be pretty much useless. That said, not everyone (including yours truly) either has that knowledge or has the finances to make it happen. (I understand that changing your computer's api address involves the use of some outside groups that often require you to pay them in return.)
 
2) You're right about the technical issues. If you know your technology and specifically how to change your computer's API (is that right?) address, then you can render most geofencing efforts to be pretty much useless. That said, not everyone (including yours truly) either has that knowledge or has the finances to make it happen. (I understand that changing your computer's api address involves the use of some outside groups that often require you to pay them in return.)

VPNs are extraordinarily cheap. About the same price as a Netflix subscription. And just as easy to use. They are also readily available on all platforms. And very common. The result is the ability to pretend you're in one of dozens of countries with a few taps of the screen or mouse clicks.
 


Back
Top Bottom