Marketing HD-R

[dbdigital]

Interesting article in RW on marketing HD-R. The author believes that HD-Radio's lack of interest on the part of the public is due to lack of advertising, particularly on media other than radio.

One of the reasons satellite radio has beaten HD-R in the public awareness category is because of the former's TV ad campaigns.

"Basically I want HD Radio’s equivalent of the satellite receiver falling out of the sky and onto American TV screens.
Satellite radio offers a lesson to us. That infant industry was successful in substantially moving the awareness meter of American consumers."

http://www.rwonline.com/pages/s.0044/t.6772.html

Of course, the author seems to have his rose-colored glasses firmly in place when he speaks of HD-R programming.
Hmm, maybe that's where some of the problem lay.

db

 

[Chuck]

Of course, the author seems to have his rose-colored glasses firmly in place when he speaks of HD-R programming.
Hmm, maybe that's where some of the problem lay.

db

I doubt that many consumers have made it that far. Most HD-2 programming is fairly dismal, but percentage wise, not many people know that...yet. If a tree falls in the forest....

The public has no clue about HD, and most of them, if they've heard of it, think they are listening to it on their conventional radio. So far, the HD radio campaign ranks right up there with the advent of "New Coke." If we live long enough, it may become a textbook example for "how not to market a new product." That's sad for an industry whose business IS advertising.

For the most part, I thought the RW article was reasonably accurate. I hope that some people who are in positions of power and influence have read it and get the message.

 

[dbdigital]

Of course, the author seems to have his rose-colored glasses firmly in place when he speaks of HD-R programming.
Hmm, maybe that's where some of the problem lay.

db

I doubt that many consumers have made it that far. Most HD-2 programming is fairly dismal, but percentage wise, not many people know that...yet. If a tree falls in the forest....

The public has no clue about HD, and most of them, if they've heard of it, think they are listening to it on their conventional radio. So far, the HD radio campaign ranks right up there with the advent of "New Coke." If we live long enough, it may become a textbook example for "how not to market a new product." That's sad for an industry whose business IS advertising.

That is certainly true. This is a reprise of the New Coke campaign.

I see it as a lack of commitment on the part of everyone involved; from radio stations and the HD-Radio Alliance to CE manufacturers.

It's obvious from looking at the HD-2, 3 offerings that radio stations are not spending the money to provide compelling content for these extra channels (public radio aside), opting for sat fed jukebox fare instead.

CE manufacturers are putting out a small number of very lackluster HD-R products; over-priced, poor performing table clock radios, a few auto radio products. Only a handfull of automakers are putting HD-R in their cars.

And nobody, including the HD-R Alliance, seems to want to spend the bucks to get the word out. I mean, is this any way to run a rollout?

db

 

[Mike Walker]

Several stations in my are are multicasting. So far I've found only one HD2 channel that I REALLY LOVE. It's "The Shuffle Channel" from WLYT in Charlotte. Here's a sample...a telescoped hour http://www.theproductionroom.net/shuffle.wma

Otherwise, the attraction of HD has been rock-solid, noise-free stereo reception in a deep fringe area where ALL of the HD stations I receive are noisy, and/or "blended" (toward mono) in analog.

 

[Mike Walker]

If you bothered to TRY one of those products, you'd realize IT IS NOT POOR PERFORMING (the BA has lackluster sensitivity. The Accurian sure as hell doesn't). Why table radios first? Because PEOPLE LISTEN FAR MORE TO TABLE RADIOS THAN COMPONENT STEREOS! Even so there are GREAT component tuners from Sangean in the affordable range, and Fanfare if you wanna' spend some dough. Receivers are in the works from Kenwood, Yamaha, and others. Efficient chips that will enable operation in small, battery-operated devices will allow Walkman-type radios/portables/etc. in a few months. In a year, or a little more, there will be quality HD products in EVERY market sector. And that, by the way, is a HELLUVA LOT FASTER than portable satellite radio made it to market. Plus there's no need to look like a space alien wearing headphones with an antenna on top

 

[dbdigital]

If you bothered to TRY one of those products, you'd realize IT IS NOT POOR PERFORMING (the BA has lackluster sensitivity. The Accurian sure as hell doesn't). Why table radios first? Because PEOPLE LISTEN FAR MORE TO TABLE RADIOS THAN COMPONENT STEREOS! Even so there are GREAT component tuners from Sangean in the affordable range, and Fanfare if you wanna' spend some dough. Receivers are in the works from Kenwood, Yamaha, and others. Efficient chips that will enable operation in small, battery-operated devices will allow Walkman-type radios/portables/etc. in a few months. In a year, or a little more, there will be quality HD products in EVERY market sector. And that, by the way, is a HELLUVA LOT FASTER than portable satellite radio made it to market. Plus there's no need to look like a space alien wearing headphones with an antenna on top

"If you bothered to TRY one of those products, you'd realize IT IS NOT POOR PERFORMING (the BA has lackluster sensitivity. The Accurian sure as hell doesn't)"

Yes, I listened to an Accurian at a RS store. The speakers were terrible and it was impossible to get HD-AM, although we have several AM stations in Los Angeles that broadcast HD. HD-FM sounded fine (except for those awful speakers).

"Why table radios first? Because PEOPLE LISTEN FAR MORE TO TABLE RADIOS THAN COMPONENT STEREOS!"

Really, from what I've read the vast majority of radio listening occurs in the car not the home.

Look, I'm not against radio going digital. In fact, if the next car I buy has an HD-Radio, I'll gladly take it. I won't pay extra for it, but I'll take it. If the next receiver I buy has HD-Radio, I'll gladly take it. I won't pay extra for it, but I'll take it.

As anyone in sales knows, one of the first hurdles to overcome is for a potential customer to understand the concept. As the RW article and Chuck pointed out, few people appear to know about or understand the concept of HD-Radio. 'Is it satellite, do I already have it?', there seems to be this kind of confusion in the minds of consumers.

Next, do listeners value radio enough to throw away their current radios and buy new ones? So far, I doubt it. Sure, terrestrial radio's strength is its localism but not everyone values localism, yourself included. As for audio quality, most people find that analog FM is good enough.

For myself, if I listen to terrestrial radio at all it's KUSC and KKJZ, two public radio stations. Both of them are well engineered and sound great in analog. For me, that's just fine. Many feel the same way I do. If I want to do some serious portable music listening, like many others, I have my iPod (or similar MP3 player). These are the kinds of hurdles HD-Radio must overcome.

db

 

[radiopilot]

If you bothered to TRY one of those products, you'd realize IT IS NOT POOR PERFORMING (the BA has lackluster sensitivity. The Accurian sure as hell doesn't). Why table radios first? Because PEOPLE LISTEN FAR MORE TO TABLE RADIOS THAN COMPONENT STEREOS! Even so there are GREAT component tuners from Sangean in the affordable range, and Fanfare if you wanna' spend some dough. Receivers are in the works from Kenwood, Yamaha, and others. Efficient chips that will enable operation in small, battery-operated devices will allow Walkman-type radios/portables/etc. in a few months. In a year, or a little more, there will be quality HD products in EVERY market sector. And that, by the way, is a HELLUVA LOT FASTER than portable satellite radio made it to market. Plus there's no need to look like a space alien wearing headphones with an antenna on top

"If you bothered to TRY one of those products, you'd realize IT IS NOT POOR PERFORMING (the BA has lackluster sensitivity. The Accurian sure as hell doesn't)"

Yes, I listened to an Accurian at a RS store. The speakers were terrible and it was impossible to get HD-AM, although we have several AM stations in Los Angeles that broadcast HD. HD-FM sounded fine (except for those awful speakers).

"Why table radios first? Because PEOPLE LISTEN FAR MORE TO TABLE RADIOS THAN COMPONENT STEREOS!"

Really, from what I've read the vast majority of radio listening occurs in the car not the home.

Look, I'm not against radio going digital. In fact, if the next car I buy has an HD-Radio, I'll gladly take it. I won't pay extra for it, but I'll take it. If the next receiver I buy has HD-Radio, I'll gladly take it. I won't pay extra for it, but I'll take it.

As anyone in sales knows, one of the first hurdles to overcome is for a potential customer to understand the concept. As the RW article and Chuck pointed out, few people appear to know about or understand the concept of HD-Radio. 'Is it satellite, do I already have it?', there seems to be this kind of confusion in the minds of consumers.

Next, do listeners value radio enough to throw away their current radios and buy new ones? So far, I doubt it. Sure, terrestrial radio's strength is its localism but not everyone values localism, yourself included. As for audio quality, most people find that analog FM is good enough.

For myself, if I listen to terrestrial radio at all it's KUSC and KKJZ, two public radio stations. Both of them are well engineered and sound great in analog. For me, that's just fine. Many feel the same way I do. If I want to do some serious portable music listening, like many others, I have my iPod (or similar MP3 player). These are the kinds of hurdles HD-Radio must overcome.

db

db is correct, if people don't want or have a need to upgrade the radios they own they will not, and if and when they upgrade and the radio has the HD already built in as Dolby, Ipod adapter, or CD player built in they will take it, but no one in the general population is running to stores wanting a specific HD radio unless they frequent 'radio boards'.

I'm listening to my Ipod right now as I'm working, playing the tunes I want to hear played in the playlist I want to hear, as I go from cubicle to office all I see on the desks or pockets are mp3 players, only one person in this office I know has a radio and it's a Sangean HDT-1, other than that there are am/fm stereo combos that sit on the shelves gathering dust as these office workers now have a new toy: mp3 players.

Will HD radio be able to compete against that, I doubt it very much... but what do I know?

Radiopilot

 

[Mike Walker]

I agree that people will upgrade to HD when they buy their next radio...most will not run out and buy one because it's new. Marketing will mostly make people aware THAT IT EXISTS, so they'll know what to look for next time they shop.

Yes, more listening is done in cars. I meant the type of device people listen to most AT HOME is table radios, not component systems. But car listening dominates, of course...especially in "drive time". Many assume listening drops off radically once people get to work. Not true. Mid-days are also a VERY listened-to time, and that takes place on small, desk-sized radios. Another reason why "table radios first" makes sense.