HD Radio, the dilemma for broadcasters

[dbdigital]

Here's a fairly balanced article in the Charlston Post on the dilemmas (and possible promise) that broadcasters are faced with in regards to HD-R.

http://www.charleston.net/news/2007/may/28/radio_stations_upgrade_hd_despite_cost_uncertain/

Couple of interesting quotes:

"Some analysts contend that radio fans will leapfrog from a traditional signal to a wireless Internet signal, skipping HD radio — and its hefty sticker price — entirely."

and:

"I tell people, 'If you've got the financial ability to run HD, I would do it,' " said Ed Seeger, American Media's chief executive officer. "But I see an equal, if not greater, opportunity for stations to stream. ... If you go on your computer right now, you've got thousands and thousands and thousands of channels."

db

 

[JbeJay]

Here's a fairly balanced article in the Charlston Post on the dilemmas (and possible promise) that broadcasters are faced with in regards to HD-R.

I agree, db. That is a reasonably well-balanced piece.

One minor quibble:
"HD radio costs listeners nothing after the upfront purchase of a receiver, but only some of the offerings will be ad-free, a major marketing point for XM and Sirius."

That makes it sounds as though all XM and Sirius channels are ad-free. Some are, some are not.

I guess, also, that it is understandable that an article about HDR, in mentioning online streaming, wouldn't go into depth about the problems which face the latter; namely, [1] the potential for Sound Exchange to make it much more expensive, if Congress doesn't step in, and [2] the Arbitron rule which doesn't count the streaming listener alongside of the radio listener unless the streaming is 100%.

But the value of the article for the Charleston SC reader is that neither it is totally "rah-rah HD will save the day" nor totally "HD is doomed and a complete waste of money".

Jay

 

[R.F. Burns]

Here's a fairly balanced article in the Charlston Post on the dilemmas (and possible promise) that broadcasters are faced with in regards to HD-R.

I agree, db. That is a reasonably well-balanced piece.

One minor quibble:
"HD radio costs listeners nothing after the upfront purchase of a receiver, but only some of the offerings will be ad-free, a major marketing point for XM and Sirius."

That makes it sounds as though all XM and Sirius channels are ad-free. Some are, some are not.

I guess, also, that it is understandable that an article about HDR, in mentioning online streaming, wouldn't go into depth about the problems which face the latter; namely, [1] the potential for Sound Exchange to make it much more expensive, if Congress doesn't step in, and [2] the Arbitron rule which doesn't count the streaming listener alongside of the radio listener unless the streaming is 100%.

But the value of the article for the Charleston SC reader is that neither it is totally "rah-rah HD will save the day" nor totally "HD is doomed and a complete waste of money".

Jay

And no mater what the cost internet streaming would be the winner if as a society we were all housebound. As of this date there is no wireless infrastucture to replace our current radio broadcast servives. Most American radio listeners do so in the car and for the time being the internet is not an option.

 

[JbeJay]

And no mater what the cost internet streaming would be the winner if as a society we were all housebound. As of this date there is no wireless infrastucture to replace our current radio broadcast servives. Most American radio listeners do so in the car and for the time being the internet is not an option.

True at present, RF, but one has to wonder whether it's only a matter of time before roadside wifi is ubiquitous.

Jay

 

[vsa]

R.F. Burns wrote: "Most American radio listeners do so in the car and for the time being the internet is not an option."

According to Arbitron (Radio Today '07) AQH radio "car" listening nationwide averages 34.8 percent Mon-Sun 6am- Midnight. "Home" listening averages 39.0 percent. "Work" listening averages 23.6 percent. "Other" comes in at 2.6 percent.

http://www.arbitron.com/downloads/radiotoday07.pdf

As usual, you are incorrect.

 

[R.F. Burns]

R.F. Burns wrote: "Most American radio listeners do so in the car and for the time being the internet is not an option."

According to Arbitron (Radio Today '07) AQH radio "car" listening nationwide averages 34.8 percent Mon-Sun 6am- Midnight. "Home" listening averages 39.0 percent. "Work" listening averages 23.6 percent. "Other" comes in at 2.6 percent.

http://www.arbitron.com/downloads/radiotoday07.pdf

As usual, you are incorrect.

Y'know you guys never fail to amaze me. Try reading the data on page 93 (weekday listening). That is when the vast majority of people listen to the radio. Most radio listening in done in morning drive in automobiles. The second most listened to daypart is afternoon drive. Outside of that you can basicaly turn the transmitters off.

 

[vsa]

R.F. Burns wrote: "Most American radio listeners do so in the car and for the time being the internet is not an option."

According to Arbitron (Radio Today '07) AQH radio "car" listening nationwide averages 34.8 percent Mon-Sun 6am- Midnight. "Home" listening averages 39.0 percent. "Work" listening averages 23.6 percent. "Other" comes in at 2.6 percent.

http://www.arbitron.com/downloads/radiotoday07.pdf

As usual, you are incorrect.

Y'know you guys never fail to amaze me. Try reading the data on page 93 (weekday listening). That is when the vast majority of people listen to the radio. Most radio listening in done in morning drive in automobiles. The second most listened to daypart is afternoon drive. Outside of that you can basicaly turn the transmitters off.

"Away from home" listening is not the same as "in-car". Look at page 96 for the correct stats. Learn to base your assertions and decisions on facts, not faulty assumptions.

 

[R.F. Burns]

R.F. Burns wrote: "Most American radio listeners do so in the car and for the time being the internet is not an option."

According to Arbitron (Radio Today '07) AQH radio "car" listening nationwide averages 34.8 percent Mon-Sun 6am- Midnight. "Home" listening averages 39.0 percent. "Work" listening averages 23.6 percent. "Other" comes in at 2.6 percent.

http://www.arbitron.com/downloads/radiotoday07.pdf

As usual, you are incorrect.

Y'know you guys never fail to amaze me. Try reading the data on page 93 (weekday listening). That is when the vast majority of people listen to the radio. Most radio listening in done in morning drive in automobiles. The second most listened to daypart is afternoon drive. Outside of that you can basicaly turn the transmitters off.

"Away from home" listening is not the same as "in-car". Look at page 96 for the correct stats. Learn to base your assertions and decisions on facts, not faulty assumptions.

The point is that the vast majoprity of radio listening is in automobiles. Office listening is normally background music and of course demographics play a major role. I will have a talk with our affiliate relations folks and get their opinion on where most radio listening takes place.

 

[davideduardo]

The point is that the vast majoprity of radio listening is in automobiles. Office listening is normally background music and of course demographics play a major role. I will have a talk with our affiliate relations folks and get their opinion on where most radio listening takes place.

An example... in Los Angeles, in in-car is around 32% of listening time (not cume, not incidents of listening). In home (45%) and at work 24%) are really the leaders.

In New York City, in-car is more like 25% of listening time, with proportional increases in the percent at home and at work.

In all cases, in-car is at most 1/3 of the total listening hours to radio.

In the People Meter, the most used daypart (based on number of folks listening to the radio) is PM Drive, followed by Mid Days, followed by mornings.

 

[JbeJay]

I think RF's point -- that in-car listening to Internet streams won't take off until or unless wireless access is commonly available -- is valid, regardless of his being incorrect about the amount of in-car listening there is.

Aside to David:

In the People Meter, the most used daypart (based on number of folks listening to the radio) is PM Drive, followed by Mid Days, followed by mornings.

How much of that is due to the fact that people are generally carrying the meter throughout the entire pmd daypart but only part of amd? I seem to recall that the average time that the respondent straps on his meter is a little after 7:00 on a weekday morning. It would seem to me that morning listening is being underrepresented, no?

Jay

 

[davideduardo]

How much of that is due to the fact that people are generally carrying the meter throughout the entire pmd daypart but only part of amd? I seem to recall that the average time that the respondent straps on his meter is a little after 7:00 on a weekday morning. It would seem to me that morning listening is being underrepresented, no?

No. The time people "activate" the meter is, essentially, the same time they get up.

Mornins have less listening in the PPM because they represent more accurately the distractions in the morning. in a diary, folks write down uninterrupted blocks of time; in reality, morning listening is on again, off again all morning long.

 

[vsa]

JbeJay wrote: "I think RF's point -- that in-car listening to Internet streams won't take off until or unless wireless access is commonly available -- is valid, regardless of his being incorrect about the amount of in-car listening there is."

Watch what happens after the HD TV transition to digital is complete in early 2009. Lots of those old analog TV frequencies will go to support Wimax wireless broadband services. I think any broadcasters who take advantage of the interesting opportunities will thrive.

Why do I think Wimax in cars will outpace HD radio? People will want wireless Internet access in their autos. Internet radio capability will come along for the ride. The same thing is happening right now with cell phones and other portable devices.

 

[dbdigital]

Here's a fairly balanced article in the Charlston Post on the dilemmas (and possible promise) that broadcasters are faced with in regards to HD-R.

I agree, db. That is a reasonably well-balanced piece.

One minor quibble:
"HD radio costs listeners nothing after the upfront purchase of a receiver, but only some of the offerings will be ad-free, a major marketing point for XM and Sirius."

That makes it sounds as though all XM and Sirius channels are ad-free. Some are, some are not.

I guess, also, that it is understandable that an article about HDR, in mentioning online streaming, wouldn't go into depth about the problems which face the latter; namely, [1] the potential for Sound Exchange to make it much more expensive, if Congress doesn't step in, and [2] the Arbitron rule which doesn't count the streaming listener alongside of the radio listener unless the streaming is 100%.

But the value of the article for the Charleston SC reader is that neither it is totally "rah-rah HD will save the day" nor totally "HD is doomed and a complete waste of money".

Jay

And no mater what the cost internet streaming would be the winner if as a society we were all housebound. As of this date there is no wireless infrastucture to replace our current radio broadcast servives. Most American radio listeners do so in the car and for the time being the internet is not an option.

Not true. There are several portable Wi-Fi devices currently available and more on the way. Plus there are plans to expand the use of cell phones as internet radios. I would provide links for all of this information but something tells me you wouldn't be interested.

db

 

[vsa]

dbdigital wrote: "...There are several portable Wi-Fi devices currently available and more on the way. Plus there are plans to expand the use of cell phones as internet radios..."

Microsoft has just received a patent for a car stereo that would include a docking station for virtually any off-the-shelf handheld computer, cellphone/pda or mp3 player.

http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199701990&cid=RSSfeed_IWK_News

 

[Mike Walker]

Oh gee...a PDA docked to my car stereo. Now that's useful! It has such a great interface for driving!

"OFFICER I HAVE A GREAT EXCUSE, I WAS TRYING TO GET THE STYLUS BACK IN THAT LITTLE SLOT!"

LOL!

 

[vsa]

Mike Walker wrote: "Oh gee...a PDA docked to my car stereo. Now that's useful! It has such a great interface for driving! "OFFICER I HAVE A GREAT EXCUSE, I WAS TRYING TO GET THE STYLUS BACK IN THAT LITTLE SLOT!"

If you would have read the link, you would have noticed the mention of Microsoft's Sync software that will just happen to appear in the 2008 Ford Focus, Fusion, Five Hundred, Edge, Freestyle, Explorer and Sport Trac; the Mercury Milan, Montego and Mountaineer; and the Lincoln MKX and MKZ.

The application enables people to bring into their cars nearly any mobile phone or digital media player, and operate it using voice commands, or controls on the vehicle's steering wheel or radio.

 

[radiopilot]

Mike Walker wrote: "Oh gee...a PDA docked to my car stereo. Now that's useful! It has such a great interface for driving! "OFFICER I HAVE A GREAT EXCUSE, I WAS TRYING TO GET THE STYLUS BACK IN THAT LITTLE SLOT!"

If you would have read the link, you would have noticed the mention of Microsoft's Sync software that will just happen to appear in the 2008 Ford Focus, Fusion, Five Hundred, Edge, Freestyle, Explorer and Sport Trac; the Mercury Milan, Montego and Mountaineer; and the Lincoln MKX and MKZ.

The application enables people to bring into their cars nearly any mobile phone or digital media player, and operate it using voice commands, or controls on the vehicle's steering wheel or radio.

There isn't a problem with the IPOD interface or cellphone interface on the dash or steering wheel, so why is there NOW a problem with any other interface... OH that's right... it's not an HD interface, officer! LOL

Radiopilot

 

[Mike Walker]

Or I could just burn an mp3 cd of my favorite songs, and leave the unnecessary doo-dads at home. I sure as hell would't spend three or four hundred dollars on a portable device, then leave it to bake in the heat of my car.

Alright...so I've got my cell phone patched through my car stereo. What EXACTLY have I gained???????

 

[vsa]

Or I could just burn an mp3 cd of my favorite songs, and leave the unnecessary doo-dads at home. I sure as hell would't spend three or four hundred dollars on a portable device, then leave it to bake in the heat of my car.

Alright...so I've got my cell phone patched through my car stereo. What EXACTLY have I gained???????

If you carry around your entire music collection on a portable device, you can listen to it with ease while it recharges. A Wimax, EV-DO or whatever transceiver can be added, either as part of Microsoft's "radio" or separately. Any portable wi-fi device, including a wi-fi enabled cellphone (which I and many other already have), could communicate through it. You could make cheap VOIP phone calls that bypass the cell networks. You could listen to whatever radio station you want wherever you are. Every radio station will have a robust signal, day and night, virtually everywhere.

I'm just getting started. Use your imagination.

 

[vsa]

Here's more of what I'm talking about Here's a preview of the future inside your automobile, available starting this fall from Ford and Microsoft.

Click on the link below and watch the video. See what HD radio is up against?

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/01/07/detroit-auto-show-ford-sync/