• 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

Hey XM! - STOP Taking Away Channels We Pay For !

J

Jkf

Once again XM preempts XM Love for 24/7 Neil Diamond. Last week it was 24/7 Elton John on The Bridge.

Why must they do this? Soon, they will be shoving the Christmas crap down our throats and preempting these channels again.

XM Love is one of their most popular channels, along with Escape. They should NEVER drop these formats for anything. Anybody actually ever get someone at XM to listen to its customers? Any feedback I have ever given them - all I get is a chain reply.
 
This is one of the major drawbacks from the Sirius/XM merger.

They really need to create an artist spotlight channel. One artist exclusively for a week, month, or whatever.

That will free up some space for new (or previously aired) channels on the line-up.
 
Apollo7979 said:
This is one of the major drawbacks from the Sirius/XM merger.

They really need to create an artist spotlight channel. One artist exclusively for a week, month, or whatever.

That will free up some space for new (or previously aired) channels on the line-up.
Click to expand...

No, it will force Sirius XM to drop another channel permanently.
 
AZJoe said:
And now we also have all Pearl Jam and all Reba channels to listen too , good gads!! ::)
Click to expand...

Star power, baby, star power! That's what the investors want to see and that's what pulls in the sheeple. ::)
 
CTListener said:
Apollo7979 said:
This is one of the major drawbacks from the Sirius/XM merger.

They really need to create an artist spotlight channel. One artist exclusively for a week, month, or whatever.

That will free up some space for new (or previously aired) channels on the line-up.
Click to expand...

No, it will force Sirius XM to drop another channel permanently.
Click to expand...

You got a point, CTListener. Even with a spotlight channel in place, they still wouldn't drop the existing artist-exclusive channels.
 
We despise dedicated artist channels.
They are wastes of bandwidth.
We will continue to feel this way until they get an all Beatles channel!
 
ai4i said:
We despise dedicated artist channels.
They are wastes of bandwidth.
We will continue to feel this way until they get an all Beatles channel!
Click to expand...

Vote with your dollar!Dont like the artist only channels,shut the service off,watch them change
their tune,but if only a few do it,it wont matter,do it in numbers.I myself hate the artist only channels,they ALL are a waste of bandwidth.Sirius LOVES to do this.
 
magicjellybeans said:
Vote with your dollar!Dont like the artist only channels,shut the service
Click to expand...
A curious thought, discontinue the service with channels we enjoy because they have channels we ignore ???
 
RadioStarOne said:
Get ready here come the x-mas channels, your not going to be pleased with the channel's they are going on either!
Click to expand...

4 = Traditions
10 = Country (short run this year: Dec. 10-25)
23 = Holly
28 = Hanukkah (nine days, starting Dec. 1)
77 = Classical (Dec. 1-25)

Same channels as last year, right? Or was Country on 17 last time around?
 
Yep, quite taking away channels we pay for, like The Strobe (XM83) and Aguila (XM92). Both fatalities of the merger. All the single artist channels should be combined into one 'superstar spotlight channel' and they get it on a rotating basis for 2 weeks, instead of hogging-up bandwidth for Elvis, Bruce, The Dead, Pearl Jam, Paul McCartney, etc...combine them all into one channel and be done with it.
More bandwidth available for the return of two other channels, plus upgrade 4 other music channels from 32KB to 40KB.

PS: I agree: change the rap channels to 16KB mono!
 
ai4i said:
We despise dedicated artist channels.
They are wastes of bandwidth.
We will continue to feel this way until they get an all Beatles channel!
Click to expand...

Please don't include "me" in your "we". :)
 
I wonder what 6 channels will be permanently replaced when the mandatory set-aside "diversity" channels come on.

I hope these new channels are something worth paying for.
 
Hey WGN-DXer: As one of the 5 main rules regarding the merger, those (6) channels were originally supposed to be offered for FREE - yes, FREE, AND work on all non-subscribed radios!
BUT, when the last go-round of FCC rules came out, Mel must have had enough martini lunches with the FCC to convince them that these stations will not longer be free, and the FCC 'agreed with Sirius' that these channels will only be offered with a Sirius/XM subscription = which I think is total BS. ALSO, they supposedly were to have had this bandwidth set-aside, and it is to be ready for use - but I wonder IF they have been using it (for Sirius Backset Video BS, or XM NavTraffic bandwidth busters?).
They only have until January to submit their requests, and March to decide and a month to get them on the air. Sirius is not supposed to charge them anything except for the satellite reception and alternate reception hardware.

DXer wrote: ...I wonder what 6 channels will be permanently replaced when the mandatory set-aside "diversity" channels come on. I hope these new channels are something worth paying for...."
 
You just have to wonder when they're going to learn that you can just stuff anything you want down the customer's throat? There are too many alternatives out there. The prediction has been in place for quite a while that as soon as municipal WiFi is viable in cars, satellite is toast. We're not there yet, but we're getting closer by the day. It's now possible to listen to music from the Internet on a smart phone while in a car.

There was a recent discussion on Leo Laporte's show that there is a developing trend in which people are getting simple phones for, well, phones and using their iPhones for Internet and media. The cell phone providers do not have enough bandwidth for everyone to do that now, but if they are going to keep customers, they're going to have to grow. 4G service will be a big step in that direction. Municipal WiFi will dramatically change things in media delivery.
 
pellmell said:
You just have to wonder when they're going to learn that you can just stuff anything you want down the customer's throat? There are too many alternatives out there. The prediction has been in place for quite a while that as soon as municipal WiFi is viable in cars, satellite is toast. We're not there yet, but we're getting closer by the day. It's now possible to listen to music from the Internet on a smart phone while in a car.

There was a recent discussion on Leo Laporte's show that there is a developing trend in which people are getting simple phones for, well, phones and using their iPhones for Internet and media. The cell phone providers do not have enough bandwidth for everyone to do that now, but if they are going to keep customers, they're going to have to grow. 4G service will be a big step in that direction. Municipal WiFi will dramatically change things in media delivery.
Click to expand...

WiFi between cities will have to happen as well. In much of the country, there are large unincorporated areas between cities and towns. You can't have municipal WiFi without a municipality to host it, can you?
 
The cellphone industry has spent millions working to lobby the FCC and lobby the Congress that "we just have to have 150MHz of spectrum for broadband"! IMO, this is BS. The cellphone companies will not be 'broadcasting' for free, and they want to steal HDTV frequencies for this spectrum! What stinks is that the FCC want to make the TV stations double-up or triple-up all on one channel - so if you have 3 TV stations now, they want all three to go to one station, AND - AT REDUCED BANDWIDTH! So instead of 1080, you would have three 480 streams, and sports would have horrible digital artifacts! I consider this totally unacceptable. What about you? They make up buy new TVs and/or converter boxes, now they want to 'dump-down' the quality ALREADY just for the big billions to be had by the cellphone robber-barons! I do not want 'pay to play' broadband at the expense of free OTA broadcast HDTV. ONE TV station can reach a million, but it takes a million frequencies to stream to a million people on cellphones. Broadcasting is so much more efficient than broadband!
 
If there is a demand in the country, there will be service, just like cable, which is MUCH more expensive to provide and maintain than WiFi.

I'm not typical, but from a personal perspective, the TV stations can do whatever they want with regard to bandwidth, compression, and programming. There is so little programming on TV worth watching that I'm trying to convince my wife to drop cable. We're in a market with sufficient OTA signals. We watch one station 80% of the time. There are days when I don't even turn on the TV. The Internet has cut into my TV time AND into my reading time. That's not necessarily good, but I'm hooked.

Cable was worth paying for the enhanced channel line up back when CNN had credibility. Now, I wonder if it's worth paying through the nose for HGTV, which my daughter watches. It's hard to tell the Evening News from Entertainment Tonight.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom