Khti share 0.6. Time for a new format?

[Signal Geek]

And, maybe, 570. Never underestimate the coverage of 5kw on 570!

Let me add 710 to the list of L.A. AM's with nearly full-market coverage. But that's only in the daytime. And their pending downgrade/transmitter location change will remove them from the list.

 

[davideduardo]

Guess what - all over the world the places where the poorest among the population try to build a life for themselves are less desirable than where the rich live, and the jobs there are not the most lucrative.

The problem is the one authorities in CA are now trying to reverse engineer: too many larger lots, to much space wasted on spreading out homes with big yards and the like.

And the issue is compounded in the LA area by many traditional neighborhoods becoming undesirable or "cordoned off" as they become ethnically concentrated as Korean, Hispanic, Armenian, Persian and even Samoan neighborhoods that are unintentionally exclusionary.

And the people populating the IE but working in the LA area are not "the poorest". They are actually the ones buying nice homes in Fontana and the like and driving to Pasadena or downtown or even Irvine to work. They are the authors of the McMansion, in fact.

The poorest live in East LA, in Compton, in Huntington Park, in South Central. Those who move up with increased education and income move outward.

You seem awfully concerned about the smog there, but I have never heard you complain of the smog in Mexico City, which is so bad that that in 1992 the UN declared it to be the "most polluted city in the world" and six years later the "most dangerous city for children". My guess is the people who live in the IE have it much better than the lower working class of Mexico City.

You can't compare a working class neighborhood in a nation that is transitioning from underdeveloped to that of a developed nation. California's minimum wage is more per hour than the whole day's minimum in Mexico, so the comparison has to start there.

In 1970 I was offered the job of programming all 5 of Grupo Radio Centro's FMs when we discussed separating them from the AM simulcasts that they had. I considered moving from my haven at 10,000 feet above sea level with no pollution and turned them down; a year later I was living on the beach in San Juan, PR with trade winds and no contamination. So, yes, I am very aware of the problems you get when you put a city into a bowel with no prevailing winds, surrounding mountains and foundations built on nature's sponge.

Oh, the lower working class or functionally unemployed live on the city's outskirts where the air is much cleaner. If you want to live in Tecamachalco or Jardines del Pedregal, you get pollution with your nice home. In Latin America, often the lowest income people live on city outskirts. The more wealthy live in the established areas. And the poor live on the hills in Latin America... such as the favelas in Brazil, while in the US hillside properties are the wealthiest. You can't compare such different economies and societies.

Please don't make comparisons with a city you don't know and have never lived in.

Not everyone makes large six figure salaries and can afford to retire to Palm Springs and look down on their less fortunate brethren. This may come as surprise to you, but some people actually consider themselves fortunate to live there, regardless of its problems.

I don't live in Palm Springs; I live, in fact, about 30 miles away. Oh, and most of Palm Springs is lower income and includes both Hispanic and Black "ethnic neighborhoods".

I left Glendale, where average income is over $68,000 for my area where the average is $48,000 because home prices and lots of services are significantly lower cost than in LA and where we only need one car and the traffic is bearable.

But, yeah, I made a good income because I was pretty damned good at what I was doing. We live in a type of meritocracy (except in government) and in our business people who can create #1 billing radio stations were rewarded for it. I make no excuses for having some very good radio stations and having been compensated for it,

Michael does not generally use ridiculously unnecessary invective to make his point, and immediately took exception to my calling him out on it, which leads me to believe he didn't realize how patronizing his comment was; an honest faux pas - we all make them. You jumping up to defend the faux pas as somehow justified while further patronizing the area is another matter.

There was nothing on this planet... in this universe in fact... patronizing about stating a fact about the Inland Empire market that supports the original argument that the place had grown like weeds and "outsized" the signal of a rimshot FM licensed to a little town up in the mountains that I could not afford to buy a house in.

BTW, I am well aware of the low wages earned at the warehouses there. I know firsthand because they were among the many jobs I took to put myself through college. I also know firsthand the IEs many problems. I was born and (for part of my childhood) raised there. While I have moved on, make a very nice living for myself and live in a much more disereable part of town, I never forget where I came from, and at the time I was damned glad for every low-wage dollar I earned there.

I don't know your age, but I'm guessing the you have seen at least two adult decades of change in the IE. Huge housing developments that don't make use of vertical space, overburdened roads, lack of rainfall and mountains that contain contamination.

Just as government folks are seeing the issues with housing built in fire-susceptable locations, we have excessive construction of warehouses and the wrong kinds of housing in the IE. Lack of planning, too much "we need the tax revenue" and too little future thinking.

... all this over a comment about how over-expansion with little planning and regulation had made the IE market unlivable and, for radio, bigger than all but a couple of its local radio signals.

 

[davideduardo]

Let me add 710 to the list of L.A. AM's with nearly full-market coverage. But that's only in the daytime. And their pending downgrade/transmitter location change will remove them from the list.

Yes, but daytime only coverage does not make a station competitive today. The increased noise levels in recent decades have made 710 less than competitive now.

In fact, even 1110 was competitive daytime, as were 980 and 930 and 790 and 1150 and 1020. But the night signals, which are in use well into AM and PM drive in half of the year, gradually made those signals inadequate and increasing noise finished them off.

In 1965, KHJ had enough signal to cover nearly all the population of the market... as did its 1110 and 980 competitors. Today, none of those signals comes even close to being usable, particularly at night.

Are we back on subject yet?

 

[Michael Rivers Kramer]

Here’s an L-R view of KHTI. While it looks better than the FCC propagation. It does appear that a larger area gets at least 70dbu.

RabbitEars.Info

RabbitEars, where you can learn all about local, over-the-air TV channels.

www.rabbitears.info