Radio World: HD Marketing Ineffective

[dumber than a box of hair]

Some bullet points from their May 21st editorial:

--Peter Ferrara of the HD Alliance was quoted as saying that consumer awareness of HD Radio is at "unprecedented levels." He claims 77% consumer awareness. Arbitron and Edison Media Research both disagree. Their studies show no growth of awareness of HD Radio (Arbitron's study shows a slight drop...26% in January 2007, 24% in January 2008). According to the studies, 66% of consumers are either not very interested or not interested at all, and only 6% were very interested in HD.

--Those results come after two years of ad support worth close to half a billion dollars.

--American Media Services did their own study, showing that only about one-third of American adults are somewhat or very familiar with HD Radio.

The full editorial is not yet online.

 

[BRNout]

This information seems to concur with my anecdotal experience. I have a couple of friends who are always into the latest technology. All are much earlier adopters than the average consumer.

They were each moderately interested in satellite radio when it came out and each bought systems (most went with XM because of the perception of deeper musical variety). These are folks who had HD TVs back in 2002-2003 and have traded in those sets for new ones already. And, not one has any interest in HD radio. The consensus seems to be that the offerings aren't worth the trouble of buying a new radio. None have plans to do so, either.

Of the group, I am the only one to buy an HD radio and am so far not particularly impressed. Perhaps my impending move to the midwest will provide me with a better "HD Experience" than I am getting near Philly. A guy can hope, right? :

 

[Savage]

BRNout, what specifically are your disappointments with HD?

a. Digital coverage?
b. Inability to defeat HD to prevent analog/digital "hunting?"
c. Interference?
d. HD-FM not enough of an improvement over analog FM quality?
e. HD-AM quality too artificial/fatiguing?
f. Programming choices not enough to justify purchase?

Any combination of these?

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

The full editorial was posted today:

http://www.radioworld.com/pages/s.0044/t.13601.html

 

[kyscott]

The problem is they are marketing something the consumers don't want.

 

[pocket-radio]

I’m not sure if you’re are aware but it’s not a good time for radio now.
The greed mongers (cousins to the oil pigs) have solely focused on nothing but short-term profits. As a result, resources are being eliminated, jobs are being cut and it’s become more difficult for talent to find work. The trend is towards more voice tracking and cyber jocks. Pd’s are responsible for programming 3 & 4 stations. Clearly the people left manning old fashion radio are under more pressure and can’t do any more! They’re burnt out and can’t do anymore!

And now we have HD? This is like a boat anchor on a sinking ship.
Yes you’ll find new HD stations. But they’re similar to what we currently have on Am/Fm. Owners/GM’ are working under tight budgets, and have no incentives to throw marketing money or resources at stations where only a few receivers exist. Radio is all about ratings and MONEY!

Clear Channel printed the following words. “The Vanishing Mass Market”
About 10 years ago, less is more was created in response to the glut of ad on radio.
According to CC then, mass media is dead as consumers insist on being treated as individual with unique needs and preferences.

While HD may sound a little better than Fm it’s still a mass media approach which if we believe the evil empire is dead. Adults 12-34 don’t care about radio. Let alone HD.
Radio has no relevance in their lives. And I’m afraid another jukebox format that sounds a little better is dead wrong. Thus 66% of Americans have no interest in HD radio.
And until more units are sold and HD delivers ratings stations won’t invest any money!

HD is DOA. It’s a chicken and egg situation.

Clear Channel has the biggest investment in HD And I wonder why? But they’re trying to unload their mess to (suckers) bain/lee. Clear Channel knew mass media was dead along time ago and this is their exit to take the money and run. Now I doubt bain/lee an investment company who doesn’t know what they don’t know will be able to carry the torch for HD radio. At least Clear Channel had an invested interest in making this pig work.

Why upgrade when my current radios receives the same programming and work fine?

 

[Carmine5]

Finally had a chance to read RW's other article on HD, the one by Leslie Stimson. The article deals with a compendium of issues currently being debated about HD-R.

http://www.rwonline.com/pages/s.0049/t.13597.html

Here again the focus is on FM, absolutely no mention of HD-AM. This tells me that more experts are realizing that using IBOC on AM is a serious mistake, at least as it's implemented now.

The focus was mostly on the 10 dB increase that iBiquity is trying to push through. But the article made this point:

"Most manufacturers exhibiting transmission equipment said few customers have headroom in their transmitters to go up the full 10 dB, but that even a 2 or 3 dB increase would provide a noticeable benefit in signal strength and coverage."

So it maybe that, in the end, most stations will only get a modest increase in power levels anyway.

Then we have two more senators, Claire McCaskill and Olympia Snowe, asking the FCC to set conditions on the satcaster merger before they approve it.

One condition is to: "make sure that the satcasters do not block automakers from including HD Radio technology alongside satellite receivers in vehicles." I assume there asking that no exclusive deals between the satcasters and automakers blocking HD Radio from cars be allowed.

http://fmqb.com/Article.asp?id=711775

Finally we have this article about Mexico authorizing stations 'within 200 miles' of the U.S. border to begin broadcasting HD Radio.

Naturally iBiquity is pleased: "We’re deeply grateful to the Mexican broadcasting industry for its decision to join the HD Radio phenomenon," said Bob Struble." I'm not so sure U.S. AM broadcasters who are near the border will be equally as happy.

The article also said this: "...commercial implementation (of HD-R) is also gaining momentum in Brazil and The Philippines." I'm assuming that is the extent of HD Radio implementation outside the U.S.

http://fmqb.com/Article.asp?id=711267

C5

 

[SUPERCASTER]

"Shocking" news (for some) from the article referenced by Carmine5:

http://www.rwonline.com/pages/s.0049/t.13597.html

In a recent study, the Consumer Electronics Association asked respondents what CE gift they would most like to receive. Most said an MP3 player; nobody said they wanted an AM/FM tuner or clock radio, he said.

Radio is becoming irrelevant and must find a way to reinvent itself and think beyond getting tuners in all portable audio devices, he says.

Radio needs to become a service provider for portable media players so listeners can customize what they want to hear on their device.

No measurable interest in radio, much less HD radio.

 

[OKCRadioGuy]

"The problem is they are marketing something the consumers don't want." I couldn't have said it better myself. HD is pretty much like re-inventing the wheel. No one gives a crap for the most part. That leads me back to saying the ONLY usefulness of the current arrangement is for brokered groups and local sports broadcasts. It's a pretty expensive investment for such a small group of potential returns, but at least it's an idea to recoup some of the costs. With that being said the FM Extra system is just as good and costs a lot less to set up. The only disadvantage to it right now would be that there are fair amount of radios for HD out there if one looks hard enough and the price of them is actually not too bad for a specialty radio.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

"The problem is they are marketing something the consumers don't want." I couldn't have said it better myself. HD is pretty much like re-inventing the wheel. No one gives a crap for the most part. That leads me back to saying the ONLY usefulness of the current arrangement is for brokered groups and local sports broadcasts. It's a pretty expensive investment for such a small group of potential returns, but at least it's an idea to recoup some of the costs. With that being said the FM Extra system is just as good and costs a lot less to set up. The only disadvantage to it right now would be that there are fair amount of radios for HD out there if one looks hard enough and the price of them is actually not too bad for a specialty radio.

$15 for a pocket, battery operated (25 hours), WiFi digital High Definition radio that let's you select from thousands of stations worldwide, including many HD radio streams!

HD radio is, or soon will be toast.

http://www.csr.com/radiopro/

 

[JJS]

$15 for a pocket, battery operated (25 hours), WiFi digital High Definition radio that let's you select from thousands of stations worldwide, including many HD radio streams!

That's $15 for the core electronics. Still needed: LCD, case, user interface. And a WiFi subscription with a bit plan that makes casual use cost-effective. Otherwise, this'll only be portable around the house.

 

[Chuck]

Otherwise, this'll only be portable around the house.

I don't know the statistics for everyone, but that is mostly where I use a portable. Around my house, garage and yard is about it. I do carry a very small radio with me when I travel, but most hotels and many airports have free wi-fi. I'd probably pay $69.95 retail for something like that. I'll bet that could be done.

Obviously, it does not address the issue of listening in a car, but it is a start.

 

[BRNout]

BRNout, what specifically are your disappointments with HD?

a. Digital coverage?
b. Inability to defeat HD to prevent analog/digital "hunting?"
c. Interference?
d. HD-FM not enough of an improvement over analog FM quality?
e. HD-AM quality too artificial/fatiguing?
f. Programming choices not enough to justify purchase?

Any combination of these?

Mr. Savage, I'd have to say that a, c and f are the top 3. Can't even comment on HD-AM's quality, as none of our local AM stations will decode on my HD radio - despite being only 25 miles from Philadelphia. The digital coverage is too thin, the dropouts annoying, and the programming choices are not compelling enough to justify the cost for most.

When you keep these factors in mind, it makes the interference that the IBOC system cranks out on AM and FM ever so much more annoying. The bit of benefit that you get from listening to HD broadcasts is not comparable to the high cost of blotting out much of the band with hiss and interference. Especially on AM. I can see this system being of some use on FM, but it should be banished immediately from AM.