How to kill an industry

[SirRoxalot]

Thanks to Nick Gerard for pointing out this article in Forbes.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/11/19/peggy-noonan-on-steve-jobs-and-why-big-companies-die/

Sound like any broadcasting companies you know? Of course, it's not just broadcasting, but it's still frightening when you think of how many companies seem headed for destruction. At the top are too many guys thinking "I'll have mine, so what's the problem?"

 

[davideduardo]

Sound like any broadcasting companies you know? Of course, it's not just broadcasting, but it's still frightening when you think of how many companies seem headed for destruction. At the top are too many guys thinking "I'll have mine, so what's the problem?"

Let's see... Steve Jobs = iPod. Steve Jobs = iTunes. Steve Jobs = iPad. Steve Jobs = iPhone.

Maybe Steve Jobs will receive the credit for transforming terrestrial radio from what will be seen a a small, provincial business into a new media force.

Of course, if radio does not make the transition from towers and transmitters, then Steve Jobs will be blamed for killing terrestrial radio.

 

[Tom Wells]

Yes, we must destroy the village to save it.

In order for radio for radio to survive, it needs to reject its best features and most useful characteristics?

This is similar to saying if we would like to avoid death, we need to embrace the idea of becoming "the living dead".

No thank you on turning my radio into a CPU app, and no thank you on becoming a zombie.


Perspective is everything, and radio has come to think it is in the same business as other media, so
it keeps trying to pretend to "be as good as" or somehow keep measuring aganst the other things.

It's like watching an athlete suffer poor performance in a sport because their body type cannot be competetive in a
particular sport.



That which has become so perverted by commercialism to the point it no
remembers what it really is/was will collapse anyway on its own internal vacuum.

Meanwhile any inherent value contained in the actual thing itself still exists.

Society can decide to kill broadcast media, but electromagnetic spectrum and modes ideal for
broadcast will always exist. But I'm sure we'll all be VERY happy with our data plans.

It's too hard to earn money these days by actual creation, so many resort to destroying the value of the work of others.
There is always a lot of money available if you can roll a good story of BS to the right people , like ibiquity did.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

This is a topic on which I wander from side to side, day by day.

You see, I have this congenital defect. I have this overwhelming attraction to the idea of "community". Forget about "business" for a moment. Most of us grew up in neighborhoods, communities, etc. (Or did we? If you lived with Mom on weekdays, and then traveled to Dads for weekends... and they lived in different communities, maybe you don't have a touch and feel for community. If you are a "Military Brat" and have lived your childhood in 12 to 24 different locations, "community" may be a foreign word to you. Maybe much more of our citizenry live under such circumstances that don't thrive on community like the Ozzie and Harriet era.)

When the pioneers and homesteaders entered new territory, they developed over time communities. The church was one connection point. The town square and court house served as connections. Then some fool showed up with a printing press in the back of his wagon and the newspaper not only helped establish "community" but ENABLED community via information. Some of us have fond memories of when a radio station showed up in our hometown and now we had an even more humanized process of being community.

The buy-at-home, shop-at-home rallying point of local merchants associations and chambers of commerce added more bulk and adhesive to the concept of community.

Today I am "camped out" here in south Appalachia. My community does not have a community radio station. Our chain-owned local newspaper is struggling between community and modern business demands. And so, where is my community? It's becoming the new media. I have built my own little community here at Radio-Info made up of people whose real name I don't know in most cases, of people whose real-estate location I don't know in many cases. But you folks are scattered from Washington State to Florida, from Phoenix to Boston. And on a down day, I can't call you up and beg: "Meet me for a cup of coffee down at the corner drug store. Help me get my heart beating this morning."

I have another similar community in the web made up of folks who make the sound system at their church function. Of all people, we should be community but we struggle. Our styles run the gamut from Gospel Rock to Beethoven, from old time orator preachers to today's conversational pastors who don't even use a pulpit.

I've tried cultivating in other venues a bit of political discussion but that has all the comfort and feeling of safety as running with the bulls over in Spain that makes news every year.

BOTTOM LINE-

Radio is being reshaped by modern business methodology on the ownership/management end. But before we build too many fires for tar-and-feathers, we have to take a good look at the target end of broadcasting. The listeners. If other potential listeners are like me... I know more about some of my friends 5 states away than I do the people living in the houses on either side of me..... Why would anybody try to run a radio station with the look, style, feel and sound of that make-believe radio station in our memory that we think should be the role-model for the industry.

Now. Excuse me while I find the remote so I can play back on the DVR a network talk show out of NYC recorded earlier this morning. (I will do that right after I download some stuff to load on the new Nano iPod my daughter gave her mother as a birthday gift this week.) So much for community.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Let's make this simple. If radio doesn't reflect the community, there won't be any need for radio. If all you're going to do is repeat syndicated or out-of-town programming, why should people listen OTA? And why should local advertisers pay for airtime.

There was a time when local radio helped to create a sense of community. It still does in some places, and at some stations. When that's lost, turn out the lights. The delivery system is secondary to the product, but nobody has invented anything simpler or more convenient than OTA radio.

 

[davideduardo]

Let's make this simple. If radio doesn't reflect the community, there won't be any need for radio.

If you ask most people under 35 or 40 or so what their community is, they will give you some kind of reference to their Facebook friends. Social networking is a vastly closer community than some sense of belonging to a geographical coincidence called a town or city.

Radio needs to reflect the new sense of community... the commonalities people feel with others. "Localism" may be great if you are selling a remote, but most of the time during most of the days of the year, there is nothing more powerful today than social networking. If radio does not become part of that community, there will be no need for radio.

If all you're going to do is repeat syndicated or out-of-town programming, why should people listen OTA? And why should local advertisers pay for airtime.

Indeed, OTA is very close to the end of its usefulness; go try to buy a radio today. American Idol, Fox News, NCIS, etc. are "syndicated" in the sense that they are national in scope, not restricted to a local market. And that's what people look for today... the method of distribution is not the issue... but one key element is that whatever it is should be accessible both live and on demand on a variety of distribution channels, and usable on whatever device the consumer consolidates entertainment on.

There was a time when local radio helped to create a sense of community. It still does in some places, and at some stations. When that's lost, turn out the lights. The delivery system is secondary to the product, but nobody has invented anything simpler or more convenient than OTA radio.

And, for a while, that will keep radio via AM and FM viable, with the cash flow needed to move on to the next stage.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Ask people where they're from, what teams they identify with, what activities they participate in, and they won't tell you "Facebook". People still identify with their communities, and the shared benefits and problems of that location. Somebody has to create the buzz that gets passed around on Facebook, Twitter, or your social network du jour. Here radio can either be a leader or a follower. In the past, it was a leader. If nothing else, radio can sort through the constant stream of information and pick out the pieces that are important to the majority of a target audience. Not everybody on Facebook hears everything.

Its a canard that people expect the same content from TV and radio. TV has established itself as primarily national programming, and that's what people expect. Some radio owners would like to see radio move in that direction, and are proceeding in that direction. We'll see how that works out for them, especially in markets where competitors tailor their content to a local audience.

AM and FM will be viable as long as broadcasters produce content that the audience wants. The majority of on-line listening is dedicated to radio station streams, which to this point have provided mainly locally-oriented content. If your computer and/or smart phone had an AM/FM radio, you might use it if the reception was good and it was easy to use because it wouldn't slow down the rest of your data stream. But, your computer or smart phone doesn't, so people choose to eat up bits streaming music. As data caps become more common, that may change. My guess is that the cellular network will end up providing timely content, and wired and Wi-Fi networks will be used for more network intensive content and downloadable content. AM/FM will only die if some very powerful people choose to kill it. That would be a bad thing for consumers, especially those who can't afford data plans.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

AM and FM will be viable as long as broadcasters produce content that the audience wants.

I'm rolling through a small amount of sleep disorder. My brain stays focused on whatever is rolling around in it when I lay down to sleep. I live (in my sleep) the same little snippets of consciousness over and over and over and wake up not full rested.

This conversation... should I say THESE CONVERSATIONS about the future of radio, the answer to radios problems, this battle over whether radio even has a problems is my daytime disorder. This conversation goes on and on and on.

We all have different meanings for certain words. Viable? Is that equal to ROBUST? Is that equal to ALIVE... BUT JUST BARELY? Is that equal to a balloon sputtering around the room until the air runs out if you release it? Is that equal to INVINCIBLE?

What I am reading, over and over and over, (Like a bad dream!) is that "what people like" and what advertisers perceive as "viable for media purchases" are in opposite corners of the room, and are not on speaking terms.

Ask people where they're from, what teams they identify with, what activities they participate in, and they won't tell you "Facebook".

That HAS BEEN my experience in the past with my peers. But today even the old fogies are much more likely to inject into casual "lets fill the room with warmth and politeness" conversation their latest discovery of something they can do on their iPhone... another vehicle for posting family pictures on the Internet for family sharing... and their latest purchase in Farmville. I only have ONE FRIEND who ever brings up what he has recently heard on the radio. He worked in radio for a few years early in life.

Little rural towns and smaller cities used to have miniature golf and PUTT-PUTT courses. Made a good Summer season business for a school teacher... maybe a coach. Today metropolitan land prices make them somewhat non-VIABLE. The other thing you don't often see in today large cities are gardens... as in vegetable gardens. The exception being the "Urban Farming" movement which is becoming popular in areas where property values have plummeted and the poor people who remain there need the food. If the trends many people in these discussions are describing continue, maybe a time will come when certain portions of radio crash and burn as advertisers turn to other media (Social Media?) and people like me and you who still have a love for radio in our lives will find a 'radio ghetto' somewhere and we can plant our favorite radio concepts in something of an "Urban Farming Spectrum" plot. Maybe we can figure out the radio equivalent of PUTT-PUTT and even the kids will gather around our new found treasure.

And then again... maybe I'm just having another bad dream. ;D

 

[Groove1670]

Small market stations need to build a loyal following with community news, info, sports, events to survive. If you build that loyal audience they will follow you online. If you run a Jukebox forget it.... At least it has always worked that way for us.

 

[Casey]

But, your computer or smart phone doesn't, so people choose to eat up bits streaming music. As data caps become more common, that may change. My guess is that the cellular network will end up providing timely content, and wired and Wi-Fi networks will be used for more network intensive content and downloadable content. AM/FM will only die if some very powerful people choose to kill it. That would be a bad thing for consumers, especially those who can't afford data plans.

That was the case, and will continue to be for a while. But it will be short-lived. 4G LTE/wi-max networks can handle a lot of traffic. Data streams ranging from 24-128kbps won't make any sizable impact on 4G networks. We have already seen Verizon offer to double caps recently. The cellular companies know small caps will work for now. Most people do fit within their cap and those that don't are very profitable. But data consumption is growing overall and more people will in time start hitting their caps and things will begin to change. As it continues, caps will come up since the networks will be able to handle it, and internet radio streams will squeeze their way in. There is only so much consumers will pay for data. We have not hit the highest yet, but once we do, prices will fall. I can see this happening within 2-3 years. Easy distribution won't be much of an advantage for AM/FM/SiriusXM for long.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Casey, I hate to tell you this, but 4G relies on running fiber to every cell tower. Right now, a LOT of cell towers are serviced by old copper repurposed into T-carriers. As more people adopt 4G, you'll need more towers to service them because there's only so much bandwidth available.

Shorter ranges allow frequencies to be reused more often. That means you'll have to build more towers, and run a lot more fiber, and that ain't cheap. NIMBYs really hate cell towers. AT&T and Verizon are instituting caps because they don't have the capacity in most areas, so limiting traffic or charging a LOT more for it helps pay for the expansion. They also want to protect their wired Internet services, which bring in a lot of money in areas where they've already invested in infrastructure. If you've got 4G at home, and can share it, you may be tempted to drop your wired connection. The telecoms sure don't want to give up that revenue stream.

 

[PTBoardOp94]

Verizon's 4G LTE, currently being rolled out, is capable of 100 Mbps per 20 MHz channel. One 20 MHz channel is capable of supporting as many as 1,000 audio streams. A typical cell site will have several such channels, the exact number varying with location.

The future's already here in many markets.

 

[TheBigA]

This thread has drifted away from the subject in the Forbes article.

We shouldn't forget that Steve Jobs was a marketing wiz. Anyone who ever saw him at the annual Mac conference will tell you that was his forte. Wozniak built the Apple 2, but Jobs sold it. So Jobs was a salesman.

We should also keep in mind that Bob Pittman of Clear Channel and Dan Mason of CBS are longtime radio programmers, not sales people.

It's easy to come up with enemies, and blame sales people for killing an industry. But the reality is that the a media revolution took place ten years ago. It wasn't caused by corporations killing radio. It was caused by innovation in other areas. This isn't about live & local or anything else. It's about putting quality content in front of the public. That's the business we're in.

 

[nocomradio]

I always figure this same sort of conversation was taking place over the checkerboard and nail keg in the local general store sometime around 1910 or so when the telegraph was on the way out and wireless was coming to be. Fast forward to where we are now and there is also a lack of nail kegs and and checkerboards and general stores. Why? The times are changing.

We don't use buggy whips, kerosene lanterns, wringer wash machines, scythes, mules, dump rakes and other things of the era for the same reason, they have been replaced with new technology that works. I recently visited a friend who restores jukeboxes. They are beautiful pieces of functional art that still work as they did when new, along with having a charm that is lacking in any device today. But..........they weigh 300 lbs, use vinyl records, have tube amplifiers, a pile of mechanical contacts, lots of individual bulbs and many, many moving parts to wear out. I can understand why someone looked at one 25 years ago and said, "I can make a better, smaller and simpler device. We are seeing the same thing happen today. And we probably like it about as much as the jukebox repairman did in the late 70's.............

 

[davideduardo]

Verizon's 4G LTE, currently being rolled out, is capable of 100 Mbps per 20 MHz channel. One 20 MHz channel is capable of supporting as many as 1,000 audio streams. A typical cell site will have several such channels, the exact number varying with location.

The future's already here in many markets.

Yeah, at $50 a month for 5gb and $79 for $10gb. Let's see... on HD movie can be 1.3gb or so. That means about 4 movies for $50. It's cheaper to go to the theatre where the screen is more than 4" wide.

I have had 4g on Verizon for 7 months. In LA, half the places I go have no signal. so it falls back. In The Desert there is no 4G. At my Prescott home, there is no 4G and the fallback sucks frogs. I still pay $10 a gb, no matter whether it works or not.

Ma Bell was a bitch, and her kids grew up to be criminals.

"The Future" arrived, but we had to send it back for more work as it appeared we were sent a late Alpha test of The Future, and the Beta has been delayed. I sometimes fear that The Future is vaporware, while the present is just a later release of Visicalc.

 

[davideduardo]

This thread has drifted away from the subject in the Forbes article.

We shouldn't forget that Steve Jobs was a marketing wiz. Anyone who ever saw him at the annual Mac conference will tell you that was his forte. Wozniak built the Apple 2, but Jobs sold it. So Jobs was a salesman.

But Jobs imagined the iPod, iPhone, iTunes and the iPad. Wozniak did not create or build them. Jobs identified a market because he felt what kinds of technology would work. He took risks that most companies would not dare to try because they have too many MBAs and people in departments named "Legal" and "Risk Management" who will tell you why a risk is risky, and too many people in departments named "HR" telling you that you can't change job descriptions and require people to stay late to make deadlines or, simply, "to make it work."

 

[PTBoardOp94]

Yeah, at $50 a month for 5gb and $79 for $10gb. Let's see... on HD movie can be 1.3gb or so. That means about 4 movies for $50. It's cheaper to go to the theatre where the screen is more than 4" wide.

To extend your example to, you know, radio: One hour of streaming audio will consume about $0.26 worth of bandwidth at today's prices. 

I have had 4g on Verizon for 7 months. In LA, half the places I go have no signal. so it falls back. In The Desert there is no 4G. At my Prescott home, there is no 4G and the fallback sucks frogs. I still pay $10 a gb, no matter whether it works or not.

Worse, you pay $50 or $70 a month, even if you don't use it.

"The Future" arrived, but we had to send it back for more work as it appeared we were sent a late Alpha test of The Future, and the Beta has been delayed. I sometimes fear that The Future is vaporware, while the present is just a later release of Visicalc.

Indeed, a new version of "The Future" is being worked on that has 10x the wireless capacity of today's Future with very similar hardware prices

 

[Tom Wells]

Tried to stream 3G 128 kbps WFMU today on the way home from work.
20 miles trip from N Chicago suburb of Wheeling to N side of Chicago.

6 good miles at 40 mph headed due east, two drop/rebuffers (meaning 10 or more seconds)

11 "funny" miles on a N/S section of expressway 6 drops, 3 short, 3 long.

3 good miles heading due east, 1 glitch of 3 seconds.

Maybe these are dropouts, but more likley they are failures of the handoff system, where the system
was supposed to be "noticing" which cell I was getting stronger in, so as to be able to hand off my account to that next cell,
OR assign to a higher powered "over"-cell with higher power.

Seems the seamless transfer thing must have gotten lost somehow.
There probably isn't even any implementation of the original concept where small cells were to be
overlapped by other cells where the radius was to be at least 5-10 times larger than the smaller cells.

Max-to-min distance from downtown, 23mi to 7 mi. Either capacity is lacking or coordination.

FM has multipath from planes and the 3G isn't worth much with so many occurances of abrupt silence.
AM really offers my best value, I can hear so many different things instantly from SO many places, near and far,
it's right there on the dashboard and it's free.

Individualized bandwidth in wireless is essentially piggish and increases entropy, broadcast is essentially
service to others and results in a higher ordering of values and worth for all.

 

[TheBigA]

Individualized bandwidth in wireless is essentially piggish and increases entropy, broadcast is essentially
service to others and results in a higher ordering of values and worth for all.

Horses are safer than cars too.

You can continue to program on a platform with diminishing audiences, or you can begin converting your own internal systems to where the people are going. It's not about us. It's about THEM. And THEY don't care about physics.

 

[TheBigA]

He took risks that most companies would not dare to try because they have too many MBAs and people in departments named "Legal" and "Risk Management" who will tell you why a risk is risky, and too many people in departments named "HR" telling you that you can't change job descriptions and require people to stay late to make deadlines or, simply, "to make it work."

It was his money. He can take a risk. That's what being an entrepeneur is. Who are the radio entrepeneurs today? Who is using their own money to run radio stations?

When he got rich, he put the MBAs in charge, and lost his company. He swore he wouldn't let that happen again. That's the context of his quote.