IBOC Not Playing Well in Peoria

[wkbam1690]

From the latest Radio World News Bytes:

http://www.radioworld.com/pages/s.0101/t.12456.html

Here's the article referred to:

http://www.pjstar.com/stories/033008/STE_BG6GEEC2.004.php

 

[KB1OKL]

Good article, nice to read some realistic stuff about iBlock instead of cheerleader stuff all the time.

 

[LinoNYC]

From the latest Radio World News Bytes:

http://www.radioworld.com/pages/s.0101/t.12456.html

Here's the article referred to:

http://www.pjstar.com/stories/033008/STE_BG6GEEC2.004.php

Quoting:Wayne R. Miller, a radio engineer for a number of Peoria stations as well as stations throughout Illinois, has no love for the digital direction that radio is headed in. "It's a stupid idea even on FM," he said.

And:

For the record, Miller doesn't think much of the idea of sidestream stations created by digital FM. He doesn't see how stations, already hard-pressed to scrounge up enough advertising for one stream, can afford to sponsor two or three.

What we probably have here is a classic case of egocentric proprietism. It goes "I work on this..keep out of here..."

It's why most engineers wouldn't and shouldn't meddle with programming.

Perhaps stations in his market are so inclusive in format and variety that no listeners go unserved. That is not the case in most areas where advertisers and station stick prices dictate that only the most viable formats be aired.

FM iboc subchannels do not threaten main channel fare..do people that "think" this way really believe that listeners that want country, jazz etc, will be forced to settle for AC, hip-hop? No, they'll go elsewhere and be lost to radio alltogether.

People have choices now that they didn't have when these older engineers got their start and everything revolved around AA5's and "mellow" AM audio.

AM radio is in dire need of a survival tool, iboc offers that.

FM iboc cleans up alot of the inherant and induced flaws in the system and offers a chance to cast a wider net for listeners.

There is nothing else out there that has any chance of accomplishing these goals at this point.


Lino

 

[kyscott]

What we probably have here is a classic case of egocentric proprietism. It goes "I work on this..keep out of here..."

It's why most engineers wouldn't and shouldn't meddle with programming.

He didn't say anything about programming. He was talking about advertising revenue. And it sounds like he has a pretty good handle on the market today. If you are having a hard time selling time for your main channel, why would you further dilute advertising revenue by programming three more channels?

 

[rbrucecarter5]

AM radio is in dire need of a survival tool, iboc offers that.

FM iboc cleans up alot of the inherant and induced flaws in the system and offers a chance to cast a wider net for listeners.

Yes - but can you point to a single example of an AM station increasing its ratings after conversion to IBOC?

Unfortunately the FM system also introduces a whole new set of induced flaws while solving only the signal to noise and frequency response issues. Neither of which are audible the way most people listen to radio, over a table radio, through earbuds, or in the car.

 

[Savage]

Precisely. IBOC-AM has been around for almost five years. There is utterly NO proof that HD Radio has done anything for AM other than ramp up interference levels on the band, further alienating the existing audience, and causing a lot of divisive, harmful and unnecessary controversy within the industry which is diverting resources and attention away from finding real-world solutions.

The proponents of this idiotic, unworkable system continue to cling stubbornly to it while braying about how IBOC "offers the only hope" for AM. There is not one iota of evidence to prove this. If anything, IBOC seems to be accelerating decline and disinterest in AM radio.

The system doesn't offer anything to listeners, and offers boatloads of problems to broadcasters. Receiver manufacturers continue to back quietly towards the exits. Radio Shack HD Accurians are now on-line order items and aren't even being displayed in retail outlets. This was confirmed with two conversations with RS managers in the area recently.

Forcing the system in the marketplace isn't working any better than the IBOC system works itself. Won't somebody administer the coup de grace so we can all move on?

 

[R.F. Burns]

What we probably have here is a classic case of egocentric proprietism. It goes "I work on this..keep out of here..."

It's why most engineers wouldn't and shouldn't meddle with programming.

He didn't say anything about programming. He was talking about advertising revenue. And it sounds like he has a pretty good handle on the market today. If you are having a hard time selling time for your main channel, why would you further dilute advertising revenue by programming three more channels?

Great, so multi casting won't work in Peoria. C'mon, that's a small market which is selling to mom and pop stores. Most likely any national spots they run are "must carry" spots, if they provide any syndicated fare. Major markets are much different and when you have owners who might own 4 or more stations in a market, they sell the entire cluster not just a single station. This guy sounds like he is out of touch with the way radio is sold in today's world. At the network level an advertiser might buy all news operations in say morning drive. They are most likely buying multiple news networks, alll running the same spot content. Today network distribution allows an adveritiser to send different commercial content to different stations through the use of digital flags. Yea, IBOC might not work today for a small market stand alone. In any of the larger facilities or group ownerships, its a different ball game.

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

Quoting:Wayne R. Miller, a radio engineer for a number of Peoria stations as well as stations throughout Illinois, has no love for the digital direction that radio is headed in. "It's a stupid idea even on FM," he said.

And:

For the record, Miller doesn't think much of the idea of sidestream stations created by digital FM. He doesn't see how stations, already hard-pressed to scrounge up enough advertising for one stream, can afford to sponsor two or three.

What we probably have here is a classic case of egocentric proprietism. It goes "I work on this..keep out of here..."

It's why most engineers wouldn't and shouldn't meddle with programming.

There is no "programming" discussion here. This is an economic discussion, and Miller knows exactly what he's talking about. You don't double, triple or otherwise increase the number of stations available to listeners in a given area when there is no economic basis for doing so, and then pretend there will be no consequences, particularly in a recession. Even a fully automated station has operating costs, which don't magically materialize out of thin air. They somehow must be paid for. Spreading budgetary dollars across two, three or four signals, when those same dollars were only supporting one signal previously, is a recipe for disaster. If you could, with a wave of a magic wand, make those HD secondaries pay their own way, it might help...but with pitifully few receivers out there, no measurable audience on the secondaries and programming that mass audiences are clearly not interested in (because if they were, that programming would be on primary signals, not secondaries), the whole idea of all these "stations between the stations" is nothing more than the radio business once again failing to learn from its own past.

Radio is throwing dozens of eggs into this basket labeled "HD," and running all sorts of audio streams without any economic underpinnings, in the hope of someday having them spew forth an ROI. Sorry, but they're in for a rude awakening, particularly with such blatant apathy for the product on the part of consumers. Wall Street, the current rulers of the roost in radio, does not sit still for very long when money is spent with no ROI. If radio station owners can't figure out how to jump-start this thing...and do it NOW...it's all going to crash in on them.

 

[Dighton Rockhead]

Great, so multi casting won't work in Peoria. C'mon, that's a small market which is selling to mom and pop stores.

Yea, IBOC might not work today for a small market stand alone. In any of the larger facilities or group ownerships, its a different ball game.

In the past, some of the more passionaste folks on the anti side of the discussion have claimed that IBOC represents something of a 'land grab' for large group broadcasters at the expense of the stand-alones and mom and pops.

The above quote only lends credibility to that claim.

 

[kyscott]

What we probably have here is a classic case of egocentric proprietism. It goes "I work on this..keep out of here..."

It's why most engineers wouldn't and shouldn't meddle with programming.

He didn't say anything about programming. He was talking about advertising revenue. And it sounds like he has a pretty good handle on the market today. If you are having a hard time selling time for your main channel, why would you further dilute advertising revenue by programming three more channels?

Yea, IBOC might not work today for a small market stand alone. In any of the larger facilities or group ownerships, its a different ball game.

So tell us oh great Wasneck, how is multi casting working in New York, L.A. or Chicago then? Tell us, who is making money off of multi casting? Tell us some successful multi cast programming.

anyone? anyone?

This is a flawed system with a flawed business plan. in a decade, I expect to see many stations with unused IBOC exciters in the back room sitting right next to the AM stereo exciters.

 

[Tom Wells]

And there's a LOT more of the US that is like Peoria than NYC.

I can report analog technology still working well for most people in Chicago, unless they have choen to live in the super-duper trendy south loop area, where modern sheet-metal steel framing makes for a near perfect faraday cage.
These people are too trendy to listen to radio anyway.

 

[wkbam1690]

revenue by programming three more channels?

So tell us oh great Wasneck, how is multi casting working in New York, L.A. or Chicago then? Tell us, who is making money off of multi casting? Tell us some successful multi cast programming.

anyone? anyone?

My question is, has ANY station anywhere, AM OR FM, that has adopted HD, made $1 yet from this technology?

I'm betting the answer is no...

 

[Savage]

It's not gonna take a decade. It's always dangerous to make public predictions but I'd be willing to bet a large pizza WITH toppings and a pitcher of beer that the IBOC debacle will be over except for the attendant personnel firings within 5 years. We're talking AM AND FM.

The recriminations, blamelaying and litigation will go on forever. IBOC will live on for all time as one of the great historic high profile media flops. For radio people it's a combination of the Edsel, New Coke and the XFL.
It was launched with a toxic combination of engineering stupidity and mypoia, corporate cynicism and scorched-earth cruelty, slathered with a large dollop of dishonesty. IBOC's toxic effects are poisoning the radio industry internally far beyond the system's actual impact on listeners and advertisers. For 5 years now IBOC has pitted operators against each other, ruining the decades-long cordial fraternity which has always made radio such a great way to make a living. Just goes to show how dangerous elitism is to America, wherever it's found and however it rears its head.

Yep, IBOC was always about being a land-grab for the big boys. Problem is, while they were scheming with the NAB and corrupt regulators, their audiences and advertisers went away. And since Big Radio has never understood its two core constituencies, it will continue to sink and struggle. The much-maligned real radio people - primarily in smaller markets - will continue to superserve their communities and will continue to do just fine, thanks.

Enjoy your land-grab, big radio. You've grabbed yourself a double handful of swampland and Love Canal.

 

[KB1OKL]

It's not gonna take a decade. It's always dangerous to make public predictions but I'd be willing to bet a large pizza WITH toppings and a pitcher of beer that the IBOC debacle will be over except for the attendant personnel firings within 5 years. We're talking AM AND FM.

The recriminations, blamelaying and litigation will go on forever. IBOC will live on for all time as one of the great historic high profile media flops. For radio people it's a combination of the Edsel, New Coke and the XFL.

The only difference is that people actually knew about the Edsel and New Coke. Edsel had Ford. Lincoln, Mercury etc. to fall back on and New Coke beat a hasty retreat back to the new "Coke Classic" in a hurry. IBOC just stubbornly despite all indications that it is a huge failure keeps crashing along on like a bull in a China shop.

 

[LinoNYC]

There is no "programming" discussion here. This is an economic discussion, and Miller knows exactly what he's talking about. You don't double, triple or otherwise increase the number of stations available to listeners in a given area when there is no economic basis for doing so, and then pretend there will be no consequences, particularly in a recession. Even a fully automated station has operating costs, which don't magically materialize out of thin air. They somehow must be paid for. Spreading budgetary dollars across two, three or four signals, when those same dollars were only supporting one signal previously, is a recipe for disaster. If you could, with a wave of a magic wand, make those HD secondaries pay their own way, it might help...but with pitifully few receivers out there, no measurable audience on the secondaries and programming that mass audiences are clearly not interested in (because if they were, that programming would be on primary signals, not secondaries), the whole idea of all these "stations between the stations" is nothing more than the radio business once again failing to learn from its own past.

Radio is throwing dozens of eggs into this basket labeled "HD," and running all sorts of audio streams without any economic underpinnings, in the hope of someday having them spew forth an ROI. Sorry, but they're in for a rude awakening, particularly with such blatant apathy for the product on the part of consumers. Wall Street, the current rulers of the roost in radio, does not sit still for very long when money is spent with no ROI. If radio station owners can't figure out how to jump-start this thing...and do it NOW...it's all going to crash in on them.

I'am sorry to appear rude about this, but what you are saying makes no damn sense.

Here in NYC, none of the subchannel offerings compete directly with mainchannel fare.

What they do is offer formats that while not justifiable on a main channel (thanks to Mad ave.) are potentially viable on the low-cost iboc subs.

Country, Smooth Jazz (faux Jazz), deep AOR, Jack FM, Old style Latin etc.

These channels are fare that might allow FM to compete for listeners that would otherwise look elsewhere.

Don't ignore reality, people today cannot be hearded into listening to "whatever" as they were 10 years ago, there are real choice alternatives today and more on the way.

Your company and others are going to have to offer more choices and in an era of overall declining listenership you'll need to scrape-up every prospect available.

Even if in some instances you syphon-off a few mainchannel listeners, the ad revenue is still going to the same companies.

Lino

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

Here in NYC, none of the subchannel offerings compete directly with mainchannel fare.

Try reading what I wrote. Programming is not the issue. Economics is. A station relying on a revenue stream is suddenly having that stream sliced into two, three or more pieces. Where's the economic justification for that? How does that not affect the revenue available for the main channel, which is where the money is being made?

What they do is offer formats that while not justifiable on a main channel (thanks to Mad ave.) are potentially viable on the low-cost iboc subs.

Country, Smooth Jazz (faux Jazz), deep AOR, Jack FM, Old style Latin etc.

These channels are fare that might allow FM to compete for listeners that would otherwise look elsewhere.

Don't ignore reality, people today cannot be hearded into listening to "whatever" as they were 10 years ago, there are real choice alternatives today and more on the way.[/quote]

They used to have a saying in Hollywood: You don't start making the movies better AFTER the people have stopped coming to see them. Throwing a niche format on an electronic jukebox and sticking it on a signal no one can hear is no one's idea of programming a radio station. How many people do you know who will spend $200 on a new radio just to hear a niche format who haven't already bought an iPod or a satellie radio for that purpose?

Your company and others are going to have to offer more choices and in an era of overall declining listenership you'll need to scrape-up every prospect available.

"My" company?? We've been through this before. I don't work for Entercom. Get off the pot and move on.

 

[LinoNYC]

Quoting "dumber than a box of hair"

Try reading what I wrote. Programming is not the issue. Economics is. A station relying on a revenue stream is suddenly having that stream sliced into two, three or more pieces. Where's the economic justification for that? How does that not affect the revenue available for the main channel, which is where the money is being made?

-Try understanding what I wrote, atleast here in NYC none of the subchannel offerings compete with main carrier fare. None.

They used to have a saying in Hollywood: You don't start making the movies better AFTER the people have stopped coming to see them. Throwing a niche format on an electronic jukebox and sticking it on a signal no one can hear is no one's idea of programming a radio station

Thats an awkward metaphor, but I do understand and agree with your point here. Remember though: it's early in the game. Hopefully as chips get cheaper and embedded into more average radios the system will filter into the mainstream then stations will begin to take these secondaries seriously. BTW: Z-100 here already has live hosts on it's hd2 and several other stations have begun to offer occasional hosted segments.

How many people do you know who will spend $200 on a new radio just to hear a niche format who haven't already bought an iPod or a satellie radio for that purpose?

I paid $100 w$25 rebate for my acurian and overall we can expect cheaper sets later this year.

As for the people who have (or might) buy alternate media, that is my point if you don't compete for these people, FM will cede it's future just as AM did two decades ago.

As is often the case in our exchanges, we seem to be talking past each other. There isn't much point in wasting time on this one. You may have the last word, if you choose.

Lino

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Lino said:

atleast here in NYC none of the subchannel offerings compete with main carrier fare. None.

The HD subchannels don't compete for advertising dollars, not because they wouldn't like to, but because they have virtually no advertisers, or listeners.

 

[Play Freebird]

Lino said:

atleast here in NYC none of the subchannel offerings compete with main carrier fare. None.

The HD subchannels don't compete for advertising dollars, not because they wouldn't like to, but because they have virtually no advertisers, or listeners.

Or they're simply not on the air.

I just looked at the listing of HD subchannels provided at the hdradio.com website. WPLJ is shown as offering "80s" on HD-2 and "Oldies" on HD-3 (which would appear to compete directly with WCBS-FM), but I can't find any mention of this on the WPLJ website. Are these channels still on?

Rather than HD, it seems the big push on 'PLJ's home page is PODCASTING.

Looking back at that hdradio.com site, a couple of the non-comm stations have HD-2 formats listed as "TBD". Terribly Bad Decision?

 

[LinoNYC]

Lino said:

atleast here in NYC none of the subchannel offerings compete with main carrier fare. None.

The HD subchannels don't compete for advertising dollars, not because they wouldn't like to, but because they have virtually no advertisers, or listeners.

Or they're simply not on the air.

I just looked at the listing of HD subchannels provided at the hdradio.com website. WPLJ is shown as offering "80s" on HD-2 and "Oldies" on HD-3 (which would appear to compete directly with WCBS-FM), but I can't find any mention of this on the WPLJ website. Are these channels still on?

Rather than HD, it seems the big push on 'PLJ's home page is PODCASTING.

Looking back at that hdradio.com site, a couple of the non-comm stations have HD-2 formats listed as "TBD". Terribly Bad Decision?

WPLJ's hd-3 is Scott Shannon's "true oldies" which has much older focus than WCBS-fm where the focus is on 70's-late 80's.

Lino