CBS MARKETWATCH: AFTERMARKET CAR STEREO DEMAND PROJECTED TO DROP

[pocket-radio]

“You think it's worse than the TCA of 1996? Can I poll the rest of the industry on that?”

Now that you mention it, that single act from congress made Clear Channel and their clones possible. Mom & pop radio station owners became millionaires in the process too. It also led to homogenized radio and is why content starved Jukebox corporate radio sucks. In my opinion, so far the content found on HD radio is more of the same, nothing more than rehashed jukeboxes with new names. HD radio is a high-level corporate scam, a huge carney shill,

“radio listenership is exploding among non-English speakers, who are the largest growing segment of the population.”

Analysis of Arbitron PUR numbers shows, a small but steady, across-the-board decline in audience over the last 10 years. Better polish up on your none-english.

“specific content for HD Radio, and can't be heard on the internet. A group of commercial radio companies have also developed some exclusive content for HD radio.”

I don’t care. If no one is listening then what’s the point. And judging by the lack of interest and sales of HD radio receivers most people feel the same way. And if broadcasters can’t sell ads they won’t care either.

Target has new HD receivers on the clearance rack next to some dishes and crap.

http://camgray.blogspot.com/2008/07/screw-you-hd-radio.html

 

[TheBigA]

It also led to homogenized radio

I disagree. I was there in the 70s and 80s and know that radio had become homogenized long before 1996.

In my opinion, so far the content found on HD radio is more of the same,

Spoken by a man who admits he doesn't own an HD radio.

Once again, this ignores your basic comment that was if the content was better, the radios would sell, and I disagree. I guess you have no response.

Analysis of Arbitron PUR numbers shows, a small but steady, across-the-board decline in audience over the last 10 years. Better polish up on your none-english.

This is David Eduardo territory. I'll leave it up to him.

And judging by the lack of interest and sales of HD radio receivers most people feel the same way.

As I said, people can't "feel the same way" if they have no basis to make a decision.

 

[Savage]

And I renew my call for candor. BigA You can't seriously argue here that there is a comparison between the "homogeneity" of radio today, so to speak, with radio in the 1970s and 1980s. At least not to us.

You know perfectly well that there were no national formats like Kiss and Mix and Pulse and Poop prior to the TCA of 1996, because there were no national megacompanies installing multi-market formats and promotions. Until the early 90s radio companies could only own 7 and 7, and one AM-FM to a market. Radio was still, for the most part, locally owned and locally programmed, and stations had far more content.

I'm not sure what you're saying when you say "you disagree" with the proposition "if the content were better (HD) Radios would sell" but suspect we may agree on this point for different reasons. I say: if the content were better, the radios WOULDN'T sell, because the system doesn't function well enough.

Whether or not people agree or disagree with any poster here is beside the point. Actually, the salient point is: people don't care. Analog radio works just fine for people out there. So there will be no basis for comparison because there is no motivation to compare. If HD offered something brilliantly better and unique, it might attract some slowly evolving change, but the more-of-the-same programming and the technical problems with the system will consign it to failure. Along with all the other reasons exhaustively explored here.

 

[TheBigA]

And I renew my call for candor. BigA You can't seriously argue here that there is a comparison between the "homogeneity" of radio today, so to speak, with radio in the 1970s and 1980s. At least not to us.

Sure I can. It depends how you compare, since there are more than twice as many stations now, so it might seem more prevalent. And people are far less tolerant and far more crtitical, especially of media. But radio was programmed for the most part by national trade charts and consultants. If you were an oldies station in the 70s, you had a safe list to play from. You had your rotations. It wasn't free form radio.

You know perfectly well that there were no national formats like Kiss and Mix and Pulse and Poop prior to the TCA of 1996, because there were no national megacompanies installing multi-market formats and promotions.

But there were national formats because more than 2000 radio stations ran automated formats from a handful of companies. It didn't happen because you were all owned by the same company, but it happened. I believe that if we returned to 7-7-7, you'd see the exact same thing again. Radio stations setting up "strategic relationships" and turning over their air signals to outside programmers. Heck, I see it now. Not all of the Kiss or Movin' stations are owned by the same company. When Julian Breen created the Magic format in the 70s, sure he forced it on all the Greater Media stations. But he also sold the concept to stations with different ownership. Same with the Hot Hits format and many of the other popular ones of the day. I remember when a lot of the CBS FM station switched to it, but they were used to sell that format to lots of other non-CBS stations in non-competing markets.There also was co-operation among like-programmed stations. If you listened to a progressive rock station like WNEW-FM in New York, and traveled to Boston or Cleveland or Chicago, you could find stations that played a lot of the exact same music in about the same rotation. They weren't all owned by the same company, although by the 80s, Metromedia realized it had a good thing. The idea that radio was "locally owned and localled programmed" is one of the great radio myths. There were hundreds of MSOs (multiple station owners), and it wasn't unusual to work for a distant owner. I knew a guy who worked for WKYS in Washington in the late 70s, and he took all his orders from New York.

I say: if the content were better, the radios WOULDN'T sell, because the system doesn't function well enough.

I'm not going to argue that point because I don't have your engineering knowledge. But I also know that nothing stays the same, and the system that exists right now is likely to change in some way. So I'm not about to make any hard and fast generalizations.

Whether or not people agree or disagree with any poster here is beside the point. Actually, the salient point is: people don't care. Analog radio works just fine for people out there.

I don't think the issue is analog or digital. One complaint people have is they can't find the music they want on FM radio. That's because music taste has splintered into a billion different pieces. The main thing HD gets is the ability to compete against satellite's 100 channels. That was seen as important a few years ago. Is it still important? We'll see now that satellite has been allowed to merge. But that was the purpose, to bring more stations, thus more choices, to a particular market. The fact that some people point out that's not how it's being used by some stations is a specific local problem. Local ownership making local programming mistakes, as far as I'm concerned.

By the way, I understand your specific issue with WBZ and agree with your contention that the FCC should officiate in areas where operators are interfering with each other. That was one of the reasons the FCC was created. In that area, we agree.

 

[pocket-radio]

After 1996 was the worst time for radio, the era of consolidation! I know I lived through the experience. Before then stations were owned by local owners who lived in the community and the number of stations any group could own were limited. Before consolidation we had diversity, true consultants had their impact on playlists but radio was alive with creativity. I mentioned this before. When traveling by car you could tell what city you were in by simply listening to good old radio, because then stations were unique with their own flavor. Sure AC or Country had a certain music mix, but individual stations had their own texture. Before 1996 it was a great time to be in radio.

Now we have a limited number of corporations controlling large audiences. Diversity is gone and every station has a predictable sound. Drive from Maine to Fl and you’ll see what I mean. The reason people pay for satellite radio is listeners are searching for something different. And before satellite radio started reserach
showed listeners wanted something different. I know of no reserach for HD where listeners want a better sound. Same goes for Ipods and every other gadget on the market.

You never answered my question. When people are willing to stand inline to purchase a new IPhone or pay $12.00 a month for satellite radio

Why are HD radio’s not selling?

 

[TheBigA]

Before then stations were owned by local owners who lived in the community

Some were. Just like now. But if you worked for Malrite, Jacor, Shamrock, Metromedia, Greater Media, NBC, CBS, ABC, or hundreds of other MSOs, the owner lived far away.

Before consolidation we had diversity, true consultants had their impact on playlists but radio was alive with creativity.

Before consolidation we basically had five formats. A handful of stations had creativity. The majority were heavily formatted, as I indicated in my post. Formats were syndicated by major program suppliers, syndicators, and networks. Those kinds of companies were more powerful then than they are today.

When traveling by car you could tell what city you were in by simply listening to good old radio, because then stations were unique with their own flavor.

I don't know what year you're talking about, but by the early 80s, local record labels had all but disappeared, so all the music these stations played came from a handful of major labels. Therefore, the music was pretty much the same, and the airplay charts from the time will substantiate my point.

Now we have a limited number of corporations controlling large audiences. Diversity is gone and every station has a predictable sound. Drive from Maine to Fl and you’ll see what I mean. The reason people pay for satellite radio is listeners are searching for something different.

Huh? That's the dumbest statement you've made so far. They're searching for something different, so they go to a national programming system where 100 radio stations eminate from one building, using the same air talent and playlist for the entire country? Wow. Even Clear Channel doesn't do that. You should probably rethink that statement.

You never answered my question. When people are willing to stand inline to purchase a new IPhone or pay $12.00 a month for satellite radio

Why are HD radio’s not selling?

I though I did answer your question. Can I buy a portable HD radio?

Since you visit all the blogs and websites in America, give me some statistical analysis of table radio sales...with or without HD. Compare sales of the Bose Wave with sales of HD radio. Similar? Probably. You're comparing apples and oranges. I have 8 radios in my house and NONE of them are table radios. That's one good reason why HD radio isn't selling.

 

[Savage]

Sorry, BigA, but as someone who programmed big-market stations in the 1970s owned by then-major groups I can state that your comments equating today's programming practices with those when I was in the chair, 1985-1981, are utterly inaccurate.

I was PD for LIN at WBBF Rochester 75-77, Nationwide's 13Q Pittsburgh 77-78, and Scripps-Howard's WNOX Knoxville 78-80, as well has having served as music director at WWDJ NYC when it was a Top 40 run by P&S in 73-74. I also consulted WIVK Knoxville 1981-83. Nothing remotely approaching today's centralized formats existed then.

We would have occasional, generally monthly, conference calls, we would send out a programming report where every station circulated ideas on promotions and ratings-boosting activities amongst one another. but nobody ever told us what to play or what format to play it in. I actually remember a revolt of the Nationwide PDs in 1978 in Columbus, Cleveland and me in Pittsburgh because the company hired a consultant who had some babe in LA call us with "this week's adds" to the playlist. We informed corporate as a body, that nobody in Los Angeles was going to dictate to us in this manner. Management instantly defended us.

Your comment about "local labels" is both inaccurate and doesn't prove anything. Every locale in the US and Canada had hometown record labels which generated a few highly local hits, but "local labels" were never in the history of format radio, much of a factor. Of course all the playlists looked the same. That was the hit-record system which began in the 1940s. That doesn't prove there was centralized programming, it proves that songs broke out of certain markets and spread across the country to become major hits. That's why I've got gold and platinum RIAA plaques all over my office walls and more in storage. I can assure you no suit in Columbus or Atlanta told me to add those records when they were "potential hits."

During the period you cite, when I was programming music formats, stations were highly individual. We prided ourselves on it.

 

[pocket-radio]

HD radio broadcasts are free, with no subscription fees and offers listeners clear and near cd quality sound too. Well, you’d have to be an idiot to not want that.

So I never would have guessed a portable receiver, with a chintzy, careless interface and speakers that spew a tinny unrefined sound is what’s keeping listeners from taking the plunge and enjoying hundreds of new and exciting HD radio stations.

Who woulda thunk that?

It brings back memories of my transistor pocket radio. That ran on a 9 volt battery.

 

[TheBigA]

Sorry, BigA, but as someone who programmed big-market stations in the 1970s owned by then-major groups I can state that your comments equating today's programming practices with those when I was in the chair, 1985-1981, are utterly inaccurate.

Maybe you can be specific and tell me which parts were inaccurate.

Are you telling me there was no automation in the 70s? That radio stations didn't bicycle reel to reel tapes from Bonneville or Schulke, or carry formats from Satellite Music Networks or Transtar? Was that all just a dream?

Are you telling me that Julian Breen didn't create and syndicate the Magic format to hundreds of stations, programmed from his office in New Jersey? Are you telling me there was no Hot Hits format? That Lee Abrams didn't tell rock stations what to play? Was all that just fiction?

I collect station playlists. I have thousands of them. They aren't "centralized," they're each very individual, regardless of ownership. The closest thing to a centralized playlist now comes from Cumulus. Clear Channel has some regionalized PDs, but if you compare playlists from Atlanta with St. Louis, they're very different. Adds are different, Gold is different, percentages of Gold vs recurrent is different. If they were the same, the trade publications like Billboard and Mediabase would drop those stations. No sense having a station report to a trade if it's not actually involved in making the playlist. So I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but not to the degree you and others think.

I appreciate your pointing out to pocket-radio that not all radio stations were locally owned. I know that Nationwide Communications wasn't based in Pittsburgh. And we know that Westinghouse wasn't based in Houston. Lots of non-local owners during the 70s and 80s.

Were they EXACTLY the same? No. Are you as young as you were then? No. Things are different. The way radio worked in the 60s was different from the 30s, and they're all different from today. That's what makes this exciting. So to be clear, I'm not "equating" today with the past, and if you got that impression, I apologize. But there are some similarities. Maybe not at every station, maybe not at places where you happened to work, but the examples I gave are accurate.

 

[Savage]

First of all: we've got to settle on a historical reference point if we're going to have this discussion. TransStar and SMN didn't exist in the 1970s. Schulke and Bonneville existed, as did Drake-Chenault, but there were NO automated products which were mainstream players in the heyday of mass-appeal music formats. The former two examples were solely heard on beautiful-music FMs and represented a class unto themselves. And I don't get your reference to "radio in the 30s." Radio in the 30s was far more like network TV than music-format local radio, so that's totally inapposite.

Again, from somebody who was there then and is there now: corporate radio today does NOT equate to corporate radio in the heyday of music formats for the period you cite. For example, WABC, WLS, WXYZ et al were all ABC O&Os, but the New York outlet sounded nothing like Chicago. Same deal for Nationwide's WNCI Columbus, 13Q Pittsburgh, WGAR Cleveland and countless other examples I could describe. The issue being discussed here was homogeneity of today's music formats, which no reasonably objective observer here could seriously debate.

They ALL SOUND THE SAME, a serious shortcoming pointed out in countless industry surveys of today's radio listeners who as a group object to blandness, repetition and lack of content. These complaints were the genesis of the "Jack" formats of a couple years back, which had mixed success largely because they didn't address the issues of listeners' emotional connection with the station. In the day, that was accomplished with not only music but CONTENT and local involvement plus the irreplaceable sense of listener participation which comes with live radio with a live person present on-air. Back then we had Dan Ingraham and Larry Lujack, live weather and news, bits, live phoners, and music with universal appeal. Today we have 14 in a row, a giant gob of spots, an angry-sounding liner/promo guy (who works for corporate and cranks out production elements for 54 stations) and "content" which is often repellent to a large contingent of listeners.
Example: was listening to the local Clear Channel urban/teen station over the weekend, which ran a promo for a video of an amateur stripper posted on the station's website. To observe that some of the hip-hop lyrics the station was airing was "vile" is to risk still more ridicule on this board, but I will still venture to opine that it's lack of mass-appeal programming that contributes to Balkanization of the audience and loss of personal connection there.

Bringing this all back to HD - the actual subject under discussion, as opposed to your sly suggestion that I'm so far along in years I don't remember things accurately - a rack-mounted format computer with yet another finite shading of music selection and utterly nothing else to offer, programmed on an HD-FM sub, is not a rational prescription for reviving radio's fortunes. Even if the marvelous digital delivery, cynically dangled in front of desperately inept programmers like chocolate-covered laetrile to a dying wealthy cancer victim, offered a worthwhile improvement. Which it does NOT.

 

[TheBigA]

Schulke and Bonneville existed, as did Drake-Chenault, but there were NO automated products which were mainstream players in the heyday of mass-appeal music formats.

To me, if a station is in the Top 10 in the New York ratings, it's mainstream. Bonneville's WRFM was Top 10, as were two other Beautiful Music stations in the early 70s.

The former two examples were solely heard on beautiful-music FMs and represented a class unto themselves.

Well at least you are willing to say they existed. If you took the percentage of stations that you put into a "class unto themselves," it would be equal to the number of stations owned by the Top 5 radio conglomerates today. That's a pretty big class that you're willing to kiss off. If they didn't matter in the 70s, why aren't you willing to blow off that percentage today?

For example, WABC, WLS, WXYZ et al were all ABC O&Os, but the New York outlet sounded nothing like Chicago.

For a period of time, you're right. But then Rick Sklar started to program the other stations, and they began to sound the same. As did RKO and Storer. Lots of station groups did the same thing. As certain PDs became successful, they got promoted and became group PDs. I can run through all the corporate PDS from all the station groups in the 80s, and they'll all swear they had a lot to say about what their local stations did.

The issue being discussed here was homogeneity of today's music formats, which no reasonably objective observer here could seriously debate.

Sure you can. The Wolf in Dallas is not the same as The Wolf in San Francisco. And they're not owned by the same company. Their musical focus is different, their imaging is different, they each have live & local airstaffs, and they each do things very different in terms of promotions and relationships with their audiences. Heck, their average age is different!

Even the Jack stations, which you mention, are very different. I did extensive analysis of music played on Jack in NY compared to Jack in Dallas, in Denver, and Nashville. All four were very different. The one in New York was terrible. Then I compared them to the original Jack on the internet, which is in my opinion great. The Nashville Jack is still on the air, still very successful, and is closest to the original.

The real issue isn't whether or not radio is homogenous, but whether or not people like a certain amount of familiarity. If people like it, and radio is based on what people like, then you do it.

your sly suggestion that I'm so far along in years I don't remember things accurately

I work with people of all ages, and it's been my experience that memory is not a function of age.

a rack-mounted format computer with yet another finite shading of music selection and utterly nothing else to offer, programmed on an HD-FM sub, is not a rational prescription for reviving radio's fortunes.

Since I'm not making that claim, I'll let that line pass. But I will say that if 18 million people are paying money for basically what you're describing, perhaps there IS a market for it. It depends. One thing I've learned about audiences is you can't predict what they will like, and in a marketplace where there are so many choices, you can't force them to like what you as a programmer think is great, creative, and original if what they really want is to hear the same songs played over & over again.

 

[Savage]

You're indulging in more sophistry regarding mass-appeal formats of the 1970s in trying to liken them to today's programming practices by large corporate groups. The Bonneville and Schulke tapes of the 1970s are not the equivalent of today's McFormats cluster-installed in a string of co-owned markets where the stations even run a common promotion with the contestants/winners spread across a number of cities. There is a vast difference, as there is a vast difference in the results obtained. You know it, and I know it.

18 million.....WHO? Are willing to pay for....WHAT? What the hell are you talking about???

 

[TheBigA]

You're indulging in more sophistry regarding mass-appeal formats of the 1970s in trying to liken them to today's programming practices by large corporate groups.

Mass appeal is mass appeal. You can quote me. Bill Drake told DJs at his stations exactly how long they were allowed to speak. That was 30 years ago. Sound familiar? Nothing changes. Give a radio guy some power and he wants to rule the world.

co-owned markets where the stations even run a common promotion with the contestants/winners spread across a number of cities.

It happens. But there are also loads of local contests. So what? The listeners don't care as long as they win.

18 million.....WHO? Are willing to pay for....WHAT? What the hell are you talking about???

Did you read the press release yesterday about Sirius XM? How live and local do you think all that is?

 

[pocket-radio]

I never said all stations were owned by local ownership. You did! And before 1996 I did work for my share of local ownership and out of town corporate owners.

“Before then stations were owned by local owners who lived in the community and the number of stations any group could own were limited”

The point being the number of stations corporations could own was limited.
Meaning you didn’t have 2 or 3 large corporate groups controlling all the voices in a market like we have today. And today mega radio groups own 99% of the stations in most markets. Mom and pops left are slim to none. Most sold out and became millionaires. Mom & pops would be self made corporations who grew 1 station into 5 or 10.

Savage is right, “They ALL SOUND THE SAME, a serious shortcoming pointed out in countless industry surveys of today's radio listeners who as a group object to blandness, repetition and lack of content”

Big Radio still believes its own hype when it comes to having compelling content. And you might be one of them. There are those that preach the need for HD radio to be portable. It’s not about making radio or HD portable – it’s about giving consumers reasons to listen to it. Sunday’s New York Times mentioned the 30 million-plus daily listeners of National Public Radio's Morning Edition news program. In 1980 they had an audience of just 2 million. It also pointed out that Morning Edition and its afternoon news counterpart, All Things Considered, are the second and fourth most listened to radio programs in the country.

The best content will always win regardless of medium. The real dilemma with radio is that there are too many radio stations. And now we have hundreds of new and exciting HD radio stations that will fracture current radio shares.

I have 5 radios in my house that I never listen to. With one exception my $12.00 clock radio and it still sounds great. When listening to music Pandora.com owns my ears. And I cheat on Pandora with CD’s Mp3’s and my Ipod. Radio time is limited to my car. And lately I don’t even bother turning it on anymore. And when I do my trusty Ipod plays the oldies. While you’ve been getting high smoking radio’s hype, you’ve failed to notice Steve Jobs Ipod has replaced the portable radio. And spending $100.00 hasn’t been a problem. So if people really believed HD was sexy tabletop or not, we wouldn’t be having this conversation today.

BigA I’m sorry to tell you HD radio is dead. Even in the UK HD radio is dead.

The reason 18 million subscribers pay for radio is painfully obvious. They’re trying to escape all those commercials and sweepers. And they want to hear what they want, when they want it. For example 40’s & 50’s hits that would never work on commercial radio because of ratings. It’s painfully obvious to everyone else except for people like you who are still drinking the Kool-Aid and smoking radio’s hype.

Get off the Kool-Aid and get sober. I Did and to think I was once like you drunk out of my mind on the punch and stoned from the hype.

 

[TheBigA]

The point being the number of stations corporations could own was limited.

It still is. There are ownership limits regarding the number of stations a company can own in a town, and the percentage of concentration.

But now that Sirius XM has changed the definition of the marketplace, we'll see what happens next.

Meaning you didn’t have 2 or 3 large corporate groups controlling all the voices in a market like we have today.

It depends on how many stations there are in a town. I grew up in a town where there were only two radio stations, AM & FM, and they were both owned by the local newspaper. That would not be allowed today

Savage is right, “They ALL SOUND THE SAME, a serious shortcoming pointed out in countless industry surveys of today's radio listeners who as a group object to blandness, repetition and lack of content”

You & Savage are wrong, and I have the statistics to prove it. As for your "countless surveys," who cares? People say they don't like repetition, yet their iPods are filled with a small group of songs they play over & over. People say one thing and do another. No big surprise.

There are those that preach the need for HD radio to be portable. It’s not about making radio or HD portable – it’s about giving consumers reasons to listen to it.

I don't "preach the need." You asked me why people aren't buying them. I asked you to tell me how many table radios of any sort are sold. You haven't answered me. Why dodge a simple question?

Sunday’s New York Times mentioned the 30 million-plus daily listeners of National Public Radio's Morning Edition news program.

Yes I know. That's down from 34 million two years ago. And Arbitron reports that 240 million people listen to commercial AM & FM.

The best content will always win regardless of medium.

Not true. Eight times as many people watch American Idol as watch PBS. Quite often, the best content loses to absolute crap. Take a look at the sales charts. People have terrible taste. So banking on best content is not necessarily a way to win.

Radio time is limited to my car. And lately I don’t even bother turning it on anymore.

Congratulations. According to Arbitron, less than 6% of the population behaves like you. From what I can see, you're outside the target demo for radio advertising anyway, so it doesn't matter.

BigA I’m sorry to tell you HD radio is dead. Even in the UK HD radio is dead.

I don't live in the UK, so I don't care. And I'm no cheerleader for HD either. So it doesn't matter to me.

The reason 18 million subscribers pay for radio is painfully obvious. They’re trying to escape all those commercials and sweepers.

And they're welcome to their opinion. That's what makes America great. But now that the satellite company is over a billion in debt, their world is about to change.

 

[Chuck]

I say: if the content were better, the radios WOULDN'T sell, because the system doesn't function well enough.

I'm not going to argue that point because I don't have your engineering knowledge. But I also know that nothing stays the same, and the system that exists right now is likely to change in some way. So I'm not about to make any hard and fast generalizations.

I am acquainted with quite a few very well qualified radio engineers, many of whom work in major markets, employed by large group owners. A lot of their stations are currently running HD. In private, many have told me that the system does not work as advertised and if the FCC approves a 10 db power increase, we will have a disaster on our hands. Add to that the findings of NPR Labs, as well as the comments of several well respected engineering consultants, and I think you can make a decent case that HD is not living up to expectations.

Like many people, I would like this to work. It would be great to make AM wonderful again, improve FM’s sound quality and add multicasting possibilities for stations that could use it without trespassing on your neighbors. The facts seem to indicate that it currently doesn't live up to that expectation, and it is unlikely to do so without a lot of major revisions. Even the FCC and Congress can't repeal the laws of physics.

Worse yet, the public does not seem very interested, as has been discussed over and over. If HD had happened about 1995 (before deregulation), it would have had a decent chance to succeed. That did not happen. I think the train has left the station and only those with financial interests in Ibiquity are on board.

 

[pocket-radio]

Your question is how many table top radios are sold? That’s not even relevant. You’re just repeating more stupid hype.

Here’s how the numbers work.

To date: nearly 1,750 AM/FM stations are broadcasting digitally, out of the nearly 13,000 cover 83% of the states. And only about half (800) provide unique HD content.

60 HD receivers are now available in the States, including table-top clock radio units and car radios. I might add car units includes after market receivers, an HD adapter that work with factory equipment. Factory installed HD units. And a transportable unit that works with a docking feature that is easily moved to various listening locations. Even tabletop radios are small and require little to no space. If they want HD radio, consumers have more options and price points to fit any budget. HD radio is running out of excuses for poor sales of radios.

U.S. HD radio sales totaled about 300,000 units in 2007, with about 1 million units expected to be sold this year, iBiquity says.But that's still only a tiny fraction of estimated annual radio sales of about 70 million.

Anyone capable of independent thinking can clearly see a cheap, plastic portable with tiny speakers won't be enough to drive mass consumer adoption of HD radio. The industry needs to invest more in quality content. The numbers above show programming is a regional crapshoot of varying quality. The industry has to create value through the creation of strong, passionate brands that may be augmented by music, but stand for more than 'one great song after another. Building brands takes the time, resources and energy of radio's talented programmers and creative staff -- but many are already programming three to five broadcast stations. And the idiots running mega broadcast groups are eliminating creative people and cutting expenses.

The next generation doesn’t like radio and kids don’t ask for a new radio for Christmas anymore. They want Ipods, cell phones, laptops and other devices. In dorms of college campuses you don’t see radios anymore. You do see computers, ipods and cell phones. Same goes for offices. Those little ear buds are everyplace. And if you do see a radio it’s in the corner collecting dust. People want to hear what they want when the want it. I’m afraid HD radio simply doesn’t provide what people want today. Dinasours like you will continue listening to traditional media until they die or ad revenues becomes so small it won’t matter anymore. That is of course unless radio get off the Kool-Aid and start investing in quality programming that includes web and mobile in all forms of entertainment. Dude, wake up and smell the coffee, radio is no longer about transmitters. It’s about content consumed on the terms of listeners and viewers at anyplace and anytime. That’s the future.

I could go on with more trends and facts, but as others have noticed you’ll just revert to more meaningless hype and twisted logic.

 

[TheBigA]

Your question is how many table top radios are sold? That’s not even relevant. You’re just repeating more stupid hype.

It's basic scientific method. The fact is that most HD units are table top radios, and table top radios are among the worst sellers in retail. You can buy a table-top internet radio too. HD is outselling the table-top internet radio. That's the point. It doesn't matter what the content is if it's mainly available on a device you would never buy.

Anyone capable of independent thinking can clearly see a cheap, plastic portable with tiny speakers won't be enough to drive mass consumer adoption of HD radio.

OK fine. I'd like to buy a $1000 audiophile receiver, by a top brand, that also contains HD. One that I'd look up to my home theater system with sub-woofers and flat screen TV. Can I buy one? Maybe by Yamaha. Do they sell them at the Best Buy? I'll save you the trouble. No they don't.

The next generation doesn’t like radio and kids don’t ask for a new radio for Christmas anymore. They want Ipods, cell phones, laptops and other devices.

Yes I know. You make my point. That's why the content doesn't matter. AND they're not buying iPods, cell phones, laptops, or other devices because of unique exclusive content. Let's go back to your very first comment in this thread. You said, "Dude it's not the price point or even the technology. It’s the lack of content." My point is that the content doesn't matter. Why aren't HD radios selling? Because NO radios are selling. It has nothing to do with the radio having HD in it. Satellite radios aren't selling either. Sure, if you get one for free in a car, you might listen for a few months, but when the free subscription is done, it simply becomes another item in the car that doesn't work. Is content driving satellite radio sales? Look how much money the two companies spend on content. The result is 18 million subscribers. More people listen to NPR, and they spend 5% of what XM & Sirius spent.

Back to the topic of this thread: Why is aftermarket car stereo demand projected to drop? Because no one cares. They have loads of other devices, they work just fine in the car, and they have no reason to replace what came with the car. That applies to satellite, HD, and outboard mp3 players. If you're not standard equipment, consumers don't need you. Because the quality of what's installed is sufficient to the task. There is no content that will change that. This isn't really an issue for radio companies, but for equipment manufacturers like Alpine and Audiovox. They're the ones most likely to be hurt.