Mike Walker said:
Free ? Try, $120 - $300 for new HD radios ! Then, for any decent HD channels it will be pay-for-play ! HD Radio is becoming another Satellite Radio.
-
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
"Is Pay-for-Play HD Content on Horizon?"
- Thread starter PocketRadio
- Start date
Free ? Try, $120 - $300 for new HD radios ! Then, for any decent HD channels it will be pay-for-play ! HD Radio is becoming another Satellite Radio.
M
Mike Walker
Guest
Free as in PROGRAMMING. All radios cost money. Geez! And the price for entry into HD has gone from 300 dollars to 100 in about nine months. Soon another argument will be gone...that it costs more, because soon it won't. Prices have dropped WAY faster than for digital television, and they're falling pretty quickly too. Economy of scale. It's how consumer electronics works.
Mike Walker said:
The cost of the licensing fees to iBiquity for the HD chipsets, run from $40 to half the cost of the HD radios. With the new Radiosophy priced at $120 (on-sale for $99, in hopes of spurring consumer interest), this is a good indication that HD radios will NEVER approach that of $20 Walkman radios, and will fall inline with portable DAB receivers, priced at $100 - $300. Aside from that, price is a moot-point, if consumers do not see any benefits to HD Radio.
Mike Walker said:
Wrong!.... The normal price for this radio is $256.00 look it up! Second the reason why this $100 price prevails is to get as many of these HD radios into the hands of the unbuying public... it's not the same as for the HDTV, the prices for these items continue to be high becuase of the buying market (everyone wants one), so therefore the prices remains high...
But who is buying the HD radios? The HD radio alliance KNOWS this and probably are ensuring the manufacturers are getting the retail sticker down... just look at the retail stickers for large 8 cylinder trucks and SUV's out in the market.... the lots are full of them and rebates abound!
The prices aren't falling for these HD radios because the market is geting saturated.... the prices are low to 'sucker' in the buying public... but Radio Shack and other retailers have proven different!
Radiopilot
M
Mike Walker
Guest
Ibiquity is cutting costs to stations AND manufacturers. Costs are continuing to fall rapidly...far more rapidly than I thought they would. And they WILL continue. Remember what DVD players cost just a few short years ago? Now you can get one for 25 bucks at the drugstore, and it works just fine.
Mike Walker said:
"Are you waiting in line for your HD radio?"
"If you lower the price enough, folks will buy the radio. That's the belief about HD radio that is being stoked in our industry. And, of course, it's wrong. The more you have to drop your price, the lower the chance people value what you're selling. And the less likely you are to sell your wares at any price the maker of those wares finds appealing. No matter if you're selling HD radios or satellite radios or whatever."
http://www.hear2.com/2006/11/are_you_waiting.html
As Ramsey said, the more the price is lowered, the less will be valued, what is being sold. Same goes for iBiquity lowering its fees - with only 10% of stations in HD (mainly HD Radio Alliance stations), iBiquity is trying to sucker more stations into this farce. The costs/fees of the HD Radio chipsets, will always keep the price of HD radios high - the $100 - $300 price of DAB receivers is a perfect example.
M
Mike Walker
Guest
How many times can you post links to the exact same things? The discussion has moved on. Can't you?
Mike Walker said:
How many times can you repeat yourself about the falling prices of HD radios ? You keep assuming that consumers will snatch up HD radios, when they reach a certain price-point - so in return, I have to keep countering what you say.
M
Mike Walker
Guest
New radios were announced THIS WEEK. Your information is quite a bit older than that. Every time a new, LESS EXPENSIVE radio is introduced (and it will be often from here on out), that deserves to be discussed, just as it was a few years back when dvd player prices fell like crazy, and now when prices for digital tvs are falling rapidly.
50 dollars now buys more dvd technology than 800 dollars did seven or eight years ago. 500 bucks buys more tv technology now than 5000 did just two or three years ago. And 100 dollars buys as much HD radio now as 300 did four or five MONTHS ago. This is relevant BECAUSE THIS IS A DISCUSSION OF HD RADIO! Were it a discussion of HDTV, the fact that 32" LCD tvs with really great contrast ratios are now breaking 600 bucks would be just as worthy of discussion. Ditto when they broke 500 bucks, as they may later this year. That isn't the same thing as posting links to the same negative rants by someone with an axe to grind. If there's no demand, then why are (recently) several new radios being introduced PER WEEK! Radio manufacturers obviously must see some future in this technology.
50 dollars now buys more dvd technology than 800 dollars did seven or eight years ago. 500 bucks buys more tv technology now than 5000 did just two or three years ago. And 100 dollars buys as much HD radio now as 300 did four or five MONTHS ago. This is relevant BECAUSE THIS IS A DISCUSSION OF HD RADIO! Were it a discussion of HDTV, the fact that 32" LCD tvs with really great contrast ratios are now breaking 600 bucks would be just as worthy of discussion. Ditto when they broke 500 bucks, as they may later this year. That isn't the same thing as posting links to the same negative rants by someone with an axe to grind. If there's no demand, then why are (recently) several new radios being introduced PER WEEK! Radio manufacturers obviously must see some future in this technology.
Mike Walker said:
"Karmazin Tells Senate That Broadcasters ‘Reversed Course’"
"Speaking before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, Karmazin said 230 million Americans listen to terrestrial AM/FM radio each week and that momentum for the deployment of HD Radio is gaining. “A year ago, there were only four or five HD-Radio models available and the lowest price was $599. Now there are 30 manufacturers of radios and price points under $200.” Karmazin said the radio industry, through the HD Digital Radio Alliance “has committed hundreds of millions of dollars to promoting this technology.”
http://www.twice.com/article/CA6434441.html
Ramsey is correct on how this attitude is being stoked in the HD Radio industry. Of course, there is no talk of how many HD radios have been actually sold, just how HD radio prices have fallen, and how much money the HD Radio Alliance has wasted promoting this farce.
Mike Walker said:
http://www.statsaholic.com/hdradio.com
http://www.statsaholic.com/radiosophy.com
Beats me, because there is no consumer demand !
M
Mike Walker
Guest
Mel Karmazin is a genius, and a legend to anyone who actually knows radio.
PocketRadio said:
Ok, Let's see if we can understand what Ramsey is saying here. Let me list them in his last few articles...
1) HD radios are too expensive.
2) HD radios have no appeal.
3) HD radios will lose their appeal if the price goes down.
Cripes, this guy is even more foolish than some of the strongest naysayers on this forum.
I'll say to him what I've said to you. Pick a story and stick with it.
Clouseau.
M
Mike Walker
Guest
Let's not forget the ridiculously contradictory ideas posted repeatedly here
1)-HD offers nothing of value, so nobody will listen...even when programming is free.
2)-HD must adopt a "pay-per-listen" strategy in order to survive. "Ah-ha", I can hear them say..."we told you so!"
Anyone who doesn't see a contradiction there should go to work for the Bush Administration, QUICKLY!
1)-HD offers nothing of value, so nobody will listen...even when programming is free.
2)-HD must adopt a "pay-per-listen" strategy in order to survive. "Ah-ha", I can hear them say..."we told you so!"
Anyone who doesn't see a contradiction there should go to work for the Bush Administration, QUICKLY!
Mike Walker said:
I did over-hear a conversation at NAB about making your HD-2 channel addressable. It is easy to do, and people are thinking of doing it. In fact, making the secondary channels a subscription service, or selling them to the highest bidder for data delivery may be what makes to the people who control the purse strings. Nobody knows for sure, but given the choice of running a really good, but break-even niche format or running a subscription service that generate cold, hard cash, I think the answer is obvious.
Follow the money...
Chuck said:
What would be the purpose for terrestrial radio to emulate the failed pay satellite radio philosophy. People don't want to pay for radio. I'm sure XM & Sirius wish this wasn't so but neither one is all that successful.
R.F. Burns said:
I'm sure there are people who would pay to use your HD-2 channels, just like they pay for SCA channels. Why not? Besides, who said the subscription would have to be for an audio service? I can think of all kinds of data streams that people might pay for.
Bottom line, all those new "free" channels may very well not end up being free for very long, or even something the public is invited to listen to. If I had a 100kW transmitter running HD and someone wanted to pay me more for one of my secondary channels than I could make by actually programming it with music and selling spots, I'd give the idea serious consideration. I'm sure that anyone who is responsible for the finances of a radio station would too. In the business world, the financial people really don’t care about radio programming and its content, they care about maximizing their investment. That's just the way things are.
You may have free and unique programming on most HD stations for now, but I wouldn't get too used to the idea. There is no guaranty that it will always be that way.
Chuck said:
So what is the poiint of seeling all of these multi channel capable radios just to make them inoperable in the near future, using your logic. The FCC has permissioned more bandwidth for IBOC stations which will alow further channel stream to be broadcast. Those might end up replacing today's subcarrier services. One of the reasons radio stations have added streams is to compete aginst other technologies who provide multiple channel streaming audio. To think they will forget that, makes not sense. Anyway, the current subcarier channels are mono. They wouldn't need to use an HD 2 for a mono feed. Let's see what happens before we conclude an evil scheme is at work here. Some might call that a form of paranoia.
R.F. Burns said:
It's the same logic as making analog radios obsolete. Somebody is always happy to sell you a product to replace the one that no longer delivers the goods. That’s just the way business is conducted.
R.F. Burns said:
That's true for the most part. But there really isn’t any guaranty that those streams will always be audio. See my post in another thread about FMExtra. By the way, it isn't my idea. It is what the inventors of IBOC were telling people on the NAB show floor.
R.F. Burns said:
Actually, you could divide the HD-2 channel up into as many mono channels or bit streams as you want. There is nothing in the technology that precludes that. The only real problem is how small a data-stream can you live with for a given service. To think these things will always be stereo channels of audio is a bit naive. There is really nothing carved in stone.
And no, I don't think using these secondary channels for other purposes is an "evil scheme." It has some very intriguing possibilities. I do think telling everyone that the secondary channels will always bring high quality music and entertainment to the masses is nothing short of dishonest.
C
carmine5
Guest
Well here's a kick in the teeth for any who have purchased an HD-Radio:
"Existing HD Radio receivers won't be able to tune conditional-access channels, but most industry analysts peg an installed base of perhaps a few hundred thousand HD Radio equipped receivers so far."
http://digital-am-fm.com/2007/04/hd_radio_gets_conditional_acce.html
So should more and more HD2 or 3 channels go to conditional-access current HD receivers will have less and less selection. So much for those 'stations between stations.'
C5
"Existing HD Radio receivers won't be able to tune conditional-access channels, but most industry analysts peg an installed base of perhaps a few hundred thousand HD Radio equipped receivers so far."
http://digital-am-fm.com/2007/04/hd_radio_gets_conditional_acce.html
So should more and more HD2 or 3 channels go to conditional-access current HD receivers will have less and less selection. So much for those 'stations between stations.'
C5
- Status