Looking for any HD Radio sales figures.

[calstymes]

I.B. Iquity spaketh:

If this is the case, then what is the issue. If you aren't interested in what IBOC offers then why are you even discussing it?

I am not interested enough in it to LISTEN to it. I am, however, VERY interested in what people are saying about it on these message boards and to see how thoroughly Ibiquity has duped the public. They are a very sly bunch those Ibiquity folks are.

autopaint-1 spaketh:

As I mentioned to others, analogue TV is going away soon (relatively speaking) and we'll have millions of useless analogue TV sets too. Such is life and the ways of the national land fill.

Yup, it sure does suck to be us, don'tcha think now? That is what radio is right now. One vastly large land fill full of as much canned automated programming as can be possibly sold to sponsors.

And to answer I.B.: We will be POORER because we will have to buy new receivers when the planned obsolescence of our existing receivers make them worthless... just like with HDTV. Oh wait... HDradio is a choice. That's right. HDTV is not a choice but IBOC is. I'm sorry, I forgot.

Mr. Wells makes an extremely coherent engineering argument against placing this technology on AM MW. He should be LISTENED to and taken very seriously. He is no lightweight. But unfortunately, no matter what he or anyone else says will not make any real difference. Ibiquity's speculative investors want their money back with a profit and they want it back soon. NOTHING will come between the adoption of this technology and our attempt to protect our existing equipment from being shown the door to the land fill.

Fix the product, NOT the method of delivery which actually needs no fixing. I don't recall ever hearing John Q. Public say, "Gee, I wish I could listen to radio using a digital method of delivery".

 

[IBOCRocks]

I.B. Iquity spaketh:

If this is the case, then what is the issue. If you aren't interested in what IBOC offers then why are you even discussing it?

I am not interested enough in it to LISTEN to it. I am, however, VERY interested in what people are saying about it on these message boards and to see how thoroughly Ibiquity has duped the public. They are a very sly bunch those Ibiquity folks are.

autopaint-1 spaketh:

As I mentioned to others, analogue TV is going away soon (relatively speaking) and we'll have millions of useless analogue TV sets too. Such is life and the ways of the national land fill.

Yup, it sure does suck to be us, don'tcha think now? That is what radio is right now. One vastly large land fill full of as much canned automated programming as can be possibly sold to sponsors.

And to answer I.B.: We will be POORER because we will have to buy new receivers when the planned obsolescence of our existing receivers make them worthless... just like with HDTV. Oh wait... HDradio is a choice. That's right. HDTV is not a choice but IBOC is. I'm sorry, I forgot.

Mr. Wells makes an extremely coherent engineering argument against placing this technology on AM MW. He should be LISTENED to and taken very seriously. He is no lightweight. But unfortunately, no matter what he or anyone else says will not make any real difference. Ibiquity's speculative investors want their money back with a profit and they want it back soon. NOTHING will come between the adoption of this technology and our attempt to protect our existing equipment from being shown the door to the land fill.

Fix the product, NOT the method of delivery which actually needs no fixing. I don't recall ever hearing John Q. Public say, "Gee, I wish I could listen to radio using a digital method of delivery".

You and Mr. Wells really do make some valid points, though, as I'm sure you'd expect, I don't agree with all of them.

Did people say:

"Gee, I wish I could have a small digital disc which would replace a cassette."
"Gee, I wish my TV had better resolution."
"Gee, I wish I had a set-top box with a hard drive so that I could record a show"

The point is that sometimes good inventions don't really fill a need. Sometimes they're just a better mousetrap. People aren't clamoring for digital radio...but they are clamoring for more entertainment choices. HD Radio has the potential to do that, and in a low-cost way (once the price inevitably comes down).

And there is no sunset date, and no mandatory adoption. Broadcasters can choose to run HD or not. The Mom and Pop's have a powerful ally..the public. If all is as bad as everyone says, then HD won't be around in five years, and all of this will be moot.

 

[dbdigital]

I.B. Iquity spaketh:

If this is the case, then what is the issue. If you aren't interested in what IBOC offers then why are you even discussing it?

I am not interested enough in it to LISTEN to it. I am, however, VERY interested in what people are saying about it on these message boards and to see how thoroughly Ibiquity has duped the public. They are a very sly bunch those Ibiquity folks are.

autopaint-1 spaketh:

As I mentioned to others, analogue TV is going away soon (relatively speaking) and we'll have millions of useless analogue TV sets too. Such is life and the ways of the national land fill.

Yup, it sure does suck to be us, don'tcha think now? That is what radio is right now. One vastly large land fill full of as much canned automated programming as can be possibly sold to sponsors.

And to answer I.B.: We will be POORER because we will have to buy new receivers when the planned obsolescence of our existing receivers make them worthless... just like with HDTV. Oh wait... HDradio is a choice. That's right. HDTV is not a choice but IBOC is. I'm sorry, I forgot.

Mr. Wells makes an extremely coherent engineering argument against placing this technology on AM MW. He should be LISTENED to and taken very seriously. He is no lightweight. But unfortunately, no matter what he or anyone else says will not make any real difference. Ibiquity's speculative investors want their money back with a profit and they want it back soon. NOTHING will come between the adoption of this technology and our attempt to protect our existing equipment from being shown the door to the land fill.

Fix the product, NOT the method of delivery which actually needs no fixing. I don't recall ever hearing John Q. Public say, "Gee, I wish I could listen to radio using a digital method of delivery".

For me, this article really sums up what I don't like about HD Radio. It is from a station owner who, nontheless, sees the handwriting on the wall and will be converting to IBOC.

http://www.rwonline.com/reference-room/iboc/2006.08.02-01_rw_hd_chicago_2.shtml

IBOC boosters keep whining how someone who hasn't heard HD Radio can't criticize it. And it's true, I've only heard MP3 samples and what I've heard sounds good, especially for AM. But that isn't the point.

It is the dubious engineering and politics behind IBOC as well as the power this technology is giving the media conglomorates at the expense of smaller stations that makes it and iBiquity dirty in my opinion.

Anyway it is an interesting read no matter what side of the issue you're on.

db

 

[Ray22]

Okay, if iBiquity had "great" sales figures they would be promoting them, like XM and Sirius do. And microwave ovens and every other category of electronic device has CEA sales figures. The companies live and die with these sales figures and projections. The iBiquity PR figures of "less than 100,000" could mean anything from 100,000 down to 1! Nice try.

When I purchased my JVC HD-HDR-1 HA car radio from Cruthfield they said "272" were sold so far and that was fairly recently. When I purchased a Panasonic HD car radio the same Crutchfield people said less than "200" were sold and that was after the radio had been out for some months.

I would guess there's maybe 2,000 total HD radios actually out in the real-world. Most of these would be in the hands of engineering, radio freaks, and station use. So the listening on most of these radio listening would NOT be counted by ARB, since they are members of the industry. So maybe 100 radios in Los Angeles.

A more interesting question is how many radios are being returned. That estimate next time.

 

[calstymes]

IBOCRocks proclaimed:

If all is as bad as everyone says, then HD won't be around in five years, and all of this will be moot.

Gosh, wouldn't that be fantastic?

dbdigital opined:

IBOC boosters keep whining how someone who hasn't heard HD Radio can't criticize it. And it's true, I've only heard MP3 samples and what I've heard sounds good, especially for AM.

Just so that everybody understands my perspective, I HAVE heard it when my receiver/receptor(s) stayed locked on it and yes, what I heard DID sound reasonably good. *yawn*

But that isn't the point.

And neither does the end necessarily justify the ethical (or any other) cost.

It is the dubious engineering and politics behind IBOC as well as the power this technology is giving the media conglomorates at the expense of smaller stations that makes it and iBiquity dirty in my opinion.

Thank you, dbdigital! At least somebody here besides me understands this. Yes, there has been so much dubious (at the expense of more solid) engineering and money/politics involved over the past 10 years in what has driven the technology engine on which Ibiquity has been staking its entire existence and quietly attempting to secure itself an expensive monopoly that there is a LOT more dirt around here than meets the public's eye.

Anyway it is an interesting read no matter what side of the issue you're on.

Isn't it now? Hence, my interest! I have been tangentially involved with and a casual observer to the development of this technology since the early-middle 1990s when it was the brainstorm of a network engineering mogul at a "media conglomerate" (and who very interestingly no longer has any personal involvement with it) that I am finding it absolutely fascinating as to how Ibiquity ended up where it is today.

There are SEVERAL people around who could add a lot of historical perspective to the whole and complete "IBOC story" but they don't because too much (read that "the fortunes of several key individuals") is riding on the ultimate acceptance by the public of the Ibiquity solution, regardless whether or not that solution is actually the best one which could have been developed from an engineering perspective.

 

[vsa]

As we continue to look here for more accurate sales figures for HD Radio, I noticed this item. According to the March 22, 2006 edition of Detroit News:

"And while the number of HD radios in use today is in the tens of thousands, it is expected to grow to 1 million by the end of the year, according to iBiquity Digital...That's still a sliver of the 100 million radios sold annually and the 900 million to 1 billion radios in use today."

With almost a billion analog radios in circulation, and almost 100 million analog radios still being sold each year, how long might it take for HD Radio to ever become anything more than something a few of us here debate on a message board?

 

[Ray22]

Again, I seriously doubt there are "10,000" HD radios "in actual use." Maybe 10,000 "manufactured" and yet to be sold. If you call around to the few sellers of HD radios, like Crutchfield, you will find that they say, "only sold a few hundred." Returned and refunded are another issue.

Let's face facts, sales will no doubt grow, but let's not use "inflated PR numbers."

 

[audiophile.]

As we continue to look here for more accurate sales figures for HD Radio, I noticed this item. According to the March 22, 2006 edition of Detroit News:

"And while the number of HD radios in use today is in the tens of thousands, it is expected to grow to 1 million by the end of the year, according to iBiquity Digital...That's still a sliver of the 100 million radios sold annually and the 900 million to 1 billion radios in use today."

With almost a billion analog radios in circulation, and almost 100 million analog radios still being sold each year, how long might it take for HD Radio to ever become anything more than something a few of us here debate on a message board?

iNiquity must have pulled those numbers out of their hat. ???

 

[SayNoToIBOC]

iBiquity claims that 1 million will be sold by the end of the year - try MAYBE in the 10,000s. More lies and fluff from this fraudulent company ! The Receptor HD radio is ranked around 2,000 on Amazon, behind the Sony 7600GR shortwave radio (I bet a lot of those are getting sold). In the meantime, millions of analog AM/FM radios are being sold, well ahead of HD radios.

 

[vsa]

Susan Whitall writes in the Detroit News today:

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060824/OPINION03/608240385/1032/ENT

"Quick, when's the last time you bought a tabletop radio for the house? In this decade? During the disco era? When Glenn Miller was still alive? Go to a big-box store and ask where the tabletop radios are and it's as if you asked where they keep the Hula-Hoops. That might change this holiday season, if the HD Digital Radio Alliance has its way...Peter Ferrara , president and CEO of the HD Digital Radio Alliance, hopes that HD radios will be one of this holiday season's top gifts...Ferrara concedes that he's disappointed at how slowly Detroit automakers have been to put HD radio in their cars."

Meanwhile, Senior Analyst Ben Macklin writes in yesterdays' eMarketer:

http://www.emarketer.com/Article.aspx?1004111

"It is official: Sprint/Nextel, in partnership with Intel, Motorola and Samsung, will roll out a mobile WiMAX network (a technology also known as 802.11e) at a cost of $3 billion; it is expected to be available to 100 million Americans by 2008...a WiMAX subscriber is likely to be able to receive 2-4 mbps...WiMAX becomes the moveable hotspot. Applications such as mobile VoIP, Internet radio and video as well as mobile business services will all get a boost from the introduction of WiMAX."

Does HD Radio stand a chance of gettting any traction? Is it in the proccess of being leap-frogged by disruptive technologies that started out to be inferior to radio, but have been improving and will rapidly overtake any delivery system of "radio" that traditional radio can offer? 

 

[IBOCRocks]

Susan Whitall writes in the Detroit News today:

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060824/OPINION03/608240385/1032/ENT

"Quick, when's the last time you bought a tabletop radio for the house? In this decade? During the disco era? When Glenn Miller was still alive? Go to a big-box store and ask where the tabletop radios are and it's as if you asked where they keep the Hula-Hoops. That might change this holiday season, if the HD Digital Radio Alliance has its way...Peter Ferrara , president and CEO of the HD Digital Radio Alliance, hopes that HD radios will be one of this holiday season's top gifts...Ferrara concedes that he's disappointed at how slowly Detroit automakers have been to put HD radio in their cars."

Meanwhile, Senior Analyst Ben Macklin writes in yesterdays' eMarketer:

http://www.emarketer.com/Article.aspx?1004111

"It is official: Sprint/Nextel, in partnership with Intel, Motorola and Samsung, will roll out a mobile WiMAX network (a technology also known as 802.11e) at a cost of $3 billion; it is expected to be available to 100 million Americans by 2008...WiMAX becomes the moveable hotspot. Applications such as mobile VoIP, Internet radio and video as well as mobile business services will all get a boost from the introduction of WiMAX."

Does HD Radio stand a chance of gettting any traction? Is it in the proccess of being leap-frogged by disruptive technologies that started out to be inferior to radio, but have been improving and will rapidly overtake any delivery system that traditional radio can offer?

Possibly? Sure. But you're not looking at all of the angles.

First, most cell phone TOS's state that you can't stream audio. Second, Wimax, when available, is going to take years and years before it even comes close to having the same coverage as terrestrial radio.

Finally, we don't know what the subscription prices are going to be. I know the "WiFi" in my area requires a $20/month subscription. The WiMax folks are going to need to make money somehow.

I still think you're comparing apples to oranges. You are looking at HD Radio competing with WiMax, when it's TERRESTRIAL radio competing with WiMax. HD Radio is not a separate entity from AM or FM. So unless WiMax supplants analog radio completely, HD Radio could remain unscathed. I see WiMax the same way as Satellite and iPod. Not a radio replacement, but a additional entertainment device.

My $.02.

 

[vsa]

IBOCROCKS WROTE: "Wimax, when available, is going to take years and years before it even comes close to having the same coverage as terrestrial radio."

That gives us a little time, if we pull our heads out of the sand.

"You are looking at HD Radio competing with WiMax, when it's TERRESTRIAL radio competing with WiMax.  HD Radio is not a separate entity from AM or FM.  So unless WiMax supplants analog radio completely, HD Radio could remain unscathed."

I agree it's terrestrial radio vs. Wimax. HD Radio is merely a form of terrestrial radio that is not in-demand by its users, therefore it is a dangerous diversion.

"I see WiMax the same way as Satellite and iPod.  Not a radio replacement, but a additional entertainment device."

Here, I disagree with you. For one, "radio" delivered via a high-speed wireless Internet connection will not ultimately suffer from reception limitations. How will local broadcasters compete when someone decides to target and serve a "local" market with scores of locally targetted formats without the need to buy millions or billions of dollars in "sticks"? These new competitors will not have to peddle any new specialized radios. It will also put XM and Sirius in trouble.

 

 

[IBOCRocks]

IBOCROCKS WROTE: "Wimax, when available, is going to take years and years before it even comes close to having the same coverage as terrestrial radio."

That gives us a little time, if we pull our heads out of the sand.

"You are looking at HD Radio competing with WiMax, when it's TERRESTRIAL radio competing with WiMax. HD Radio is not a separate entity from AM or FM. So unless WiMax supplants analog radio completely, HD Radio could remain unscathed."

I agree it's terrestrial radio vs. Wimax. HD Radio is merely a form of terrestrial radio that is not in-demand by its users, therefore it is a dangerous diversion.

"I see WiMax the same way as Satellite and iPod. Not a radio replacement, but a additional entertainment device."

Here, I disagree with you. For one, "radio" delivered via a high-speed wireless Internet connection will not ultimately suffer from reception limitations. How will local broadcasters compete when someone decides to target and serve a "local" market with scores of locally targetted formats without the need to buy millions or billions of dollars in "sticks"? These new competitors will not have to peddle any new specialized radios.




My $.02.

While it doesn't suffer from reception limitiations in the traditional sense it does suffer from an open architecture. All it takes is a large spike in activity or a flakey router or two to make the online listening experience not work so well.

What you see in the future could very well happen. But it will be a long, long, long time before the average person runs out and puts a WiMax only car radio in their car. I guess what I'm saying is that you make some valid points, but IMHO none stick out as a death knell for anything.

For all we know, there's a technology that will come out tomorrow that will be better than all! I just don't think we should throw away technology based on a bunch of "what-if's". Refusing to innovate because "resistance is futile" doesn't make sense to me.

 

[autopaint-1]

But without the budget for talent all those local "broadcast wannabes" will ave no audience and certainly no budget to build one. There's a cost to doing business and in reality it's those with deeep pockets who can afford the talent. The novelty of amateurs playing radio will wear off quickly.

 

[IBOCRocks]

But without the budget for talent all those local "broadcast wannabes" will ave no audience and certainly no budget to build one. There's a cost to doing business and in reality it's those with deeep pockets who can afford the talent. The novelty of amateurs playing radio will wear off quickly.

There are some pretty good "amateurs" out there though!

You have a point - there is a hard cost in bandwidth, licensing, etc. that comes with streaming a station. So then you get back to either running ads or taking subscriptions to cover the costs. Then you get back to "is it really better?"

I have heard some brilliant streaming stations, and I've heard really bad ones. It's a lot like spinning the dial!

 

[vsa]

IBOCROCKS WROTE: "...it will be a long, long, long time before the average person runs out and puts a WiMax only car radio in their car...but IMHO none stick out as a death knell for anything....Refusing to innovate because "resistance is futile" doesn't make sense to me."

I agree, it will be a long time before Wimax-only car radios become the norm, but we must factor them into our planning. Right now, we're not. We must innovate, but our innovations must target our real competitors, not short-term targets like XM and Sirius. In implementing digital terrestrial radio, we must not drive away current analog users by introducing more interference. We also must respond to listener needs, not our needs. We must also embrace new delivery systems, rather than have them put us out of business.
     
AUTOPAINT-1 WROTE: "But without the budget for talent all those local "broadcast wannabes" will ave no audience and certainly no budget to build one. There's a cost to doing business and in reality it's those with deeep pockets who can afford the talent. The novelty of amateurs playing radio will wear off quickly."

Does Yahoo's Launchcast (Internet radio) have deep pockets? Does AOL Radio have deep pockets? Does Microsoft have deep pockets? Does Google have deep pockets? How about those former broadcasters who sold their sticks at a high profit in recent years? How about all of those radio broadcasters who lost their jobs over the years thanks to massive consolidation? Don't you think some of them may be future competitors?

 

[IBOCRocks]

IBOCROCKS WROTE: "...it will be a long, long, long time before the average person runs out and puts a WiMax only car radio in their car...but IMHO none stick out as a death knell for anything....Refusing to innovate because "resistance is futile" doesn't make sense to me."

I agree, it will be a long time before Wimax-only car radios become the norm, but we must factor them into our planning. Right now, we're not. We must innovate, but our innovations must target our real competitors, not short-term targets like XM and Sirius. In implementing digital terrestrial radio, we must not drive away current analog users by introducing more interference. We also must respond to listener needs, not our needs. We must also embrace new delivery systems, rather than have them put us out of business.

AUTOPAINT-1 WROTE: "But without the budget for talent all those local "broadcast wannabes" will ave no audience and certainly no budget to build one. There's a cost to doing business and in reality it's those with deeep pockets who can afford the talent. The novelty of amateurs playing radio will wear off quickly."

Does Yahoo's Launchcast (Internet radio) have deep pockets? Does AOL Radio have deep pockets? Does Microsoft have deep pockets? Does Google have deep pockets? How about those former broadcasters who sold their sticks at a high profit in recent years? How about all of those radio broadcasters who lost their jobs over the years thanks to massive consolidation? Don't you think some of them may be future competitors?

Very good points. But has the general public complained about IBOC interference? DX'ers aside (only for this argument, I don't mean to discount them) how many average radio listeners have experienced interference? I've been involved with several HD buildouts, and have never gotten a listener complaint about IBOC interference.

I'm not debating whether or not it's there, I'm just wondering if the interference issue is really a straw-man argument, and there is a bigger issue. I certainly don't know.

 

[vsa]

Think like a typical listener thinks. When you can't receive your favorite station cleanly any more, how do you react? (1) You figure your favorite station isn't pumping out enough power any more and you may complain to it. (2) You simply move on to something that comes in better. (3) It never crosses your mind that the next-door-neighbor on the dial is jamming the station in question, so why would you complain to the true offender? If HD-R AM ever goes night-time, what typical listener will think to blame stations hundreds of miles away?

 

[IBOCRocks]

Think like a typical listener thinks. When you can't receive your favorite station cleanly any more, how do you react? (1) You figure your favorite station isn't pumping out enough power any more and you may complain to it. (2) You simply move on to something that comes in better. (3) It never crosses your mind that the next-door-neighbor on the dial is jamming the station in question, so why would you complain to the true offender? If HD-R AM ever goes night-time, what typical listener will think to blame stations hundreds of miles away?

I don't know...whenever there is even the slightest bit of tropo or anything like that interfering with our stations, my phone rings off the hook! I mean, I'd at least expect a couple of calls, but alas, nothing!

 

[vsa]

You made my point. The station that sounds fine, but is causing the adjacent channel interference, will not get complaints. The station with buzz/hash or any kind of noise on it's audio will get the complaints from their listeners. That's why YOU haven't gotten complaints. Listeners don't realize your stations are causing the bazz/hash/noise on your next door neighbors. Most listeners don't even understand why some AM station signals disappear after dark.