When this link (http://www.ibiquity.com/i/pdfs/Licensing_ Fact_ Sheet_2008A.pdf) to Ibiquity’s “HD Radio™ Broadcaster Licensing Fact Sheet” made the rounds of our email group, one member raised some questions in a reply email:
Below is a slightly edited version of the reply email I sent to our circle (with blind copies to some of Ibiquity's other nemeses):
This would explain why HD-2’s and -3’s are being dropped by commercial stations. But what public radio? What kind of deal do pubcasters get? Is there an annual renewal fee for their secondary services?
If so, how would Ibiquity assess that fee? Based on corporate underwriting for the subchannels? Or maybe on listener contributions earmarked for those “services,” if indeed there are any?
As for the proposed 10 dB increase for the FM digital side channels, that folly will hurt pubcasters in the reserved portion of the FM band, where the stations are already packed like sardines, far more than it will hurt commercial stations — though it’ll be bad enough in the Northeast, in parts of the Upper Midwest, and in California, where the rest of the band is pretty densely occupied, too.
That is, the situation would be bad enough — if enough stations did it. But that’s unlikely in the present economic climate. With contributions down, the pubcasters don’t have the money for whole new transmitter facilities; and with sales down, neither do most commercial outfits.
Of course, CBS (with Glynn Walden — co-developer of “HD” and co-founder of Ibiquity forerunner USA Digital Radio — as senior VP for engineering!) will plunge ahead, as will Clear Channel. So, too, I think, will Greater Media.
(The latter is not publicly traded, and it’s very closely held, so financial data are unavailable. But when they sold their cable systems in the Boston and Philadelphia media markets nearly ten years ago, they got $281 million from Comcast for 79,000 subscribers in Philly, and an undisclosed sum from privately-held Charter Communications for 173,000 subscribers in the Boston area. I estimate they got close to $900 million altogether, and I think they’re coasting on that! But Peter Smyth and company are no smarter than their counterparts at the publicly-traded firms, so I expect them to jump in on the “HD” power increase, too.)
Thus there would be relatively few stations doing it. But we don’t need the kind of complete bedlam we’ve seen on the AM band to bring this thing down. Just a few high profile cases, where a few major stations see a loss of revenue from the interference, will be enough to discredit this asinine system in the eyes of all but its most obstinate proponents; and as a result, you’ll see more and more commercial FM’s pulling the plug on it.
As for pubcasters, I haven’t seen “HD” receivers featured in the “NPR Shop” link on NPR’s home page for some months now; when there is a receiver, it’s always an internet radio! That tells me that NPR’s commitment to "HD" is faltering. But pubcasters are the only ones who have found any constructive use for multicasting.
So what would they do with the programming now on their HD2’s and -3’s? There’s always FMeXtra!
Below is a slightly edited version of the reply email I sent to our circle (with blind copies to some of Ibiquity's other nemeses):
This would explain why HD-2’s and -3’s are being dropped by commercial stations. But what public radio? What kind of deal do pubcasters get? Is there an annual renewal fee for their secondary services?
If so, how would Ibiquity assess that fee? Based on corporate underwriting for the subchannels? Or maybe on listener contributions earmarked for those “services,” if indeed there are any?
As for the proposed 10 dB increase for the FM digital side channels, that folly will hurt pubcasters in the reserved portion of the FM band, where the stations are already packed like sardines, far more than it will hurt commercial stations — though it’ll be bad enough in the Northeast, in parts of the Upper Midwest, and in California, where the rest of the band is pretty densely occupied, too.
That is, the situation would be bad enough — if enough stations did it. But that’s unlikely in the present economic climate. With contributions down, the pubcasters don’t have the money for whole new transmitter facilities; and with sales down, neither do most commercial outfits.
Of course, CBS (with Glynn Walden — co-developer of “HD” and co-founder of Ibiquity forerunner USA Digital Radio — as senior VP for engineering!) will plunge ahead, as will Clear Channel. So, too, I think, will Greater Media.
(The latter is not publicly traded, and it’s very closely held, so financial data are unavailable. But when they sold their cable systems in the Boston and Philadelphia media markets nearly ten years ago, they got $281 million from Comcast for 79,000 subscribers in Philly, and an undisclosed sum from privately-held Charter Communications for 173,000 subscribers in the Boston area. I estimate they got close to $900 million altogether, and I think they’re coasting on that! But Peter Smyth and company are no smarter than their counterparts at the publicly-traded firms, so I expect them to jump in on the “HD” power increase, too.)
Thus there would be relatively few stations doing it. But we don’t need the kind of complete bedlam we’ve seen on the AM band to bring this thing down. Just a few high profile cases, where a few major stations see a loss of revenue from the interference, will be enough to discredit this asinine system in the eyes of all but its most obstinate proponents; and as a result, you’ll see more and more commercial FM’s pulling the plug on it.
As for pubcasters, I haven’t seen “HD” receivers featured in the “NPR Shop” link on NPR’s home page for some months now; when there is a receiver, it’s always an internet radio! That tells me that NPR’s commitment to "HD" is faltering. But pubcasters are the only ones who have found any constructive use for multicasting.
So what would they do with the programming now on their HD2’s and -3’s? There’s always FMeXtra!
