HD radio fees

[ZRXOA 5248]

during the last week or so we touched upon the HD radio issue.

I remember one post by Neanderpaul in which he was discussing revenue and costs related to HD programming.

I was reading one of the radio trade papers (radioworld.com) and in one article on HD besides the comments from John Kerry about how as part of the XM/Sirius merger the new Sat radios must also be HD compatible.

Seeing that HD is a proprietary product, I can just imagine what IBIQUITY is going to want per unit sold.

In this link ( http://www.ibiquity.com/i/pdfs/Licensing_ Fact_ Sheet_2008A.pdf ) IBIQUITY spells out how it wants 25 grand for each main channel broadcast in HD, plus additional moneys for HD2, HD3 and any data transmissions

This is in addition to equipment.

 

[rockcaptain]

Doesn't this belong on the HD Radio board?

 

[CTListener]

There's been no confirmation that HD compatibility will be required in receivers if Sirius is allowed to consummate its acquisition of XM. That's just one of dozens of conditions being proposed by the numerous special interests -- both commercial and political -- that have been tying up the process for the past 16 months. Nobody in the blogosphere or message-board universe has a clue as to which conditions the FCC will or will not impose, or even if the deal will be OK'd at all.

 

[Skynet74]

After having 150 different channels on XM or Sirius, who the hell is even going to care about the three local HD channels you can pick up anyway? I can understand if 100 channels were available on HD radio. Then maybe there would be an issue. At least some sort of competition to speak about. But when we are talking about a number of stations that you can count on one hand, than I easily consider HD technology irrelevant.

 

[MassMusicMan]

This is further proof that John Kerry is completely useless as a politician. I'm embarrassed for having voted for him in 2004.

 

[ZRXOA 5248]

Kerry is to radio what Ed Markey is to cable tv.

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

I was reading one of the radio trade papers (radioworld.com) and in one article on HD besides the comments from John Kerry about how as part of the XM/Sirius merger the new Sat radios must also be HD compatible.

This qualifies as someone's fantasy, and from all indications is not being seriously considered by anyone in a position to make it happen. Any receiver capable of receiving AM, FM, HD on both bands AND satellite radio will be too expensive for most of the listening public to consider.

The amazing thing to me is how bent out of shape the increasingly irrelevant NAB is about satellite radio, when it should be plain to anyone/everyone that, merger or not, it will never amount to more than a niche product. Both satrad services continue to bleed money and have an ongoing problem with churn rates, despite the fact that the service is usually free for three months or more in new cars that come with satrad receivers. That hardly makes it any kind of threat to free radio. NAB continues to ignore 1) the ever-diminishing audience for its own stagnant, cookie-cutter product, about which it's doing not one blessed thing, and 2) the 140 million iPods and similar devices that consumers own. The NAB is beginning to look a lot like the RIAA...trying to hold onto an obsolete business model while the rest of the world moves on, and trying to get the government to help them.