Shepparton Experiment +5

[kenglish]

I don't remember the government paying stations to move, the first time. They helped with the repack moves, a few years ago.
I remember our CEO, Bruce Reese, telling people that they shouldn't expect sympathy for having to pay $20 for a converter box, "when I just spent eight million to convert".

 

[davideduardo]

More apples and oranges: The U.S. has licensed businesses that own/program AM stations and associated physical assets. The U.S. government can't just tell them to go silent as some sort of an experiment.

In Australia and many places in Europe, MW and SW stations are owned by the government or province. If the government there wants to see whether there is any return on their public tax-dollar investment, it makes sense to pull the plug and confirm.

In nations where the government owns fewer stations, AM has either declined on its own or been encouraged to migrate.

Migration over several decades has been the practice in Canada, where many AM stations moved to FM, starting with the CBC but then emulated by private operators.

In Mexico, their legislative body declared AM obsolete and anachronistic. A change in spacing rules (except at the US border) allowed about 80% of all stations to move to FM. Some abandoned channels have been re-used, many being employed for rural stations using indigenous languages.

In others, such as El Salvador, there was so little AM listening left after the major stations migrated to FM or audience moved to new FMs that the few remaining AMs are mostly religious. In Ecuador, of the 9 AMs I once owned, only one is still in operation... the rest have disappeared and not been replaced.

 

[Kelly A]

I don't remember the government paying stations to move, the first time. They helped with the repack moves, a few years ago.
I remember our CEO, Bruce Reese, telling people that they shouldn't expect sympathy for having to pay $20 for a converter box, "when I just spent eight million to convert".

Maybe not in all cash, but back in 1998, when the Commission started floating the idea of DTV migration for all full power stations. Most every station or group asked the question: That will cost a lot, what's in it for us?? After months of negotiations, the end result was stations would be given an additional migration channel, and consideration for future spectrum auctions freed-up after the migration was completed. During the first repack, stations who had desired channels in several markets which aligned with same channels in other markets were either reimbursed to move channels, or were paid to abandon their existing channel, multiplexing into another DTV station. Stations who were displaced due to repack, were reimbursed for equipment and labor to change channels.

 

[kenglish]

Maybe not in all cash, but back in 1998, when the Commission started floating the idea of DTV migration for all full power stations. Most every station or group asked the question: That will cost a lot, what's in it for us?? After months of negotiations, the end result was stations would be given an additional migration channel, and consideration for future spectrum auctions freed-up after the migration was completed. During the first repack, stations who had desired channels in several markets which aligned with same channels in other markets were either reimbursed to move channels, or were paid to abandon their existing channel, multiplexing into another DTV station. Stations who were displaced due to repack, were reimbursed for equipment and labor to change channels.

Going from a low-VHF transmitter to a huge UHF digital rig, and running both nearly 24/7 for over a decade, wasn't a handout. Several Utah stations began full-power DTV in the fall of 1998.

During the recent re-pack, stations got reimbursed for some things, but not all. Even spreading expenses among eight members of DTV Utah, I think it came out to about a million dollars per station/member.

 

[Kelly A]

During the recent re-pack, stations got reimbursed for some things, but not all. Even spreading expenses among eight members of DTV Utah, I think it came out to about a million dollars per station/member.

Sure, some stations did better than others. But I think even you'd agree, it was a completely different situation to the government asking all AM stations to go silent to see if anyone complains.

 

[kenglish]

I was just wondering if it might prove, one way or another, if there really are listeners. Maybe we trade AM licenses for LPFM's (no longer "translators"), or reallocate some or all AM frequencies. Let poor stations out of their real estate issues.
Whatever....maybe a learning experience?

 

[Kelly A]

I was just wondering if it might prove, one way or another, if there really are listeners. Maybe we trade AM licenses for LPFM's (no longer "translators"), or reallocate some or all AM frequencies. Let poor stations out of their real estate issues.
Whatever....maybe a learning experience?

No station who still had debt on the books would want to admit they have no, or declining listeners. Even a slight chance of getting a bank to lend you money would vanish into already pretty thin air. Gee, I turned off my radio station, and nobody noticed. How do you think that would play with advertisers?

 

[kenglish]

No station who still had debt on the books would want to admit they have no, or declining listeners. Even a slight chance of getting a bank to lend you money would vanish into already pretty thin air. Gee, I turned off my radio station, and nobody noticed. How do you think that would play with advertisers?

What if it proved that plenty of people really did listen, and were very vocal about it?
At least, then, there would be some hard evidence. Of course, that's assuming someone was available to take their phone calls.

 

[Kelly A]

What if it proved that plenty of people really did listen, and were very vocal about it?
At least, then, there would be some hard evidence. Of course, that's assuming someone was available to take their phone calls.

Put yourself in the shoes of being that business. Over the years you suspect your audience is gradually decreasing, but there are still enough advertisers willing to sponsor you to keep the business afloat and viable to whatever level. As a business owner, the last thing you would want to do is make your sponsors uneasy about advertising on your station, especially if you pay for ratings that seem to show there are listeners there in the demographic your advertisers want to reach. Shutting off the station would be like closing the doors on a brick and mortar business to see if anyone says anything. One in a hundred might complain, but that leaves ninety nine who had been listening, but just didn't complain because they assumed something happened technically.

 

[kenglish]

Put yourself in the shoes of being that business. Over the years you suspect your audience is gradually decreasing, but there are still enough advertisers willing to sponsor you to keep the business afloat and viable to whatever level. As a business owner, the last thing you would want to do is make your sponsors uneasy about advertising on your station, especially if you pay for ratings that seem to show there are listeners there in the demographic your advertisers want to reach. Shutting off the station would be like closing the doors on a brick and mortar business to see if anyone says anything. One in a hundred might complain, but that leaves ninety nine who had been listening, but just didn't complain because they assumed something happened technically.

Exactly what happened with Radio Australia!
People were too nice to complain.

 

[Kelly A]

Exactly what happened with Radio Australia!
People were too nice to complain.

Radio Australia isn't a business though. It's one of the many government-funded radio services. If nobody complains after they do the test-shutdown, or permanently, listeners will find somewhere else to go. Chances are the government entity would benefit more from the cost savings from the cost of utilities and maintenance alone. If you're a business owner and radio is your only game, you've probably already cut costs. The next step would be going out of business.

 

[kenglish]

Radio Australia was a lifeline for many people. Fishermen and maritime people used it. Farmers and ranchers, far from big cities, depended on it. And, it was also good PR for Australia in general.
Government doesn't exist to make profits. If it did, we'd eliminate police, fire, military, etc.
Support was provided to taxpaying citizens and businesses, at a reasonable cost. Now, many are without those valuable services.

 

[Kelly A]

Radio Australia was a lifeline for many people. Fishermen and maritime people used it. Farmers and ranchers, far from big cities, depended on it. And, it was also good PR for Australia in general.

Where I used to work, some used that argument to justify keeping expensive shortwave facilities up and going around the world. In most of the countries surveyed, listeners had long moved on to local or regional FM stations. Those same claims that SW stations were a lifeline to certain populations, were later proven to be B.S.

Government doesn't exist to make profits.

Government budgets are frequently under audit and subject to cuts. Expensive radio stations that nobody listens to anymore are targets of government spending cuts.

If it did, we'd eliminate police, fire, military, etc.

Oh come on, now you're being silly. MW or SW radio can't be compared with providing basic community services like fire and police. Anymore, there are many other types of media that people could turn to. The days of only being able to receive one form of media ended fifty years ago.

Support was provided to taxpaying citizens and businesses, at a reasonable cost.

Well let's see, here's an example: A certain MW facility on the island of Cyprus costs roughly $22 million dollars a year to maintain operation. Is that a reasonable cost to you??

Now, many are without those valuable services.

Valuable to less and less everyday.

 

[kenglish]

You're right, as always

 

[boombox4]

The only people who really complained when Radio Australia went off were hobbyists and most of them were far outside the target area.. and wouldnt listen to them on their smartphones or internet if (and obviously are) given the option.

They call to a travesty, etc how dare they?.. data isnt free or unlimited on the internet in rural places (gosh, dont i know that?!?!)... I get the RA shortwave purpose but somehow expect the government in this case to spend gobs of money to reach a few thousand-ish people by spending millions.

I read Oz articles about rural, predominately Outback people angry at RA being yanked off the air, because it was the most dependable radio service for them, and yes, they did pay for the service, as RA was supported by taxes, as well as the rest of the ABC.

I gather that there are a few other broadcasters aiming to fill in the need (some powerful MW station in Emerald, Queensland, which has large nighttime coverage, and another MW of SW station either in QLD or NSW somewhere), but the ABC is supposed to serve the entire population of Australia, and their emphasis on redundant, low-listener DAB in the capital cities at the expense of the rural people in the Outback (predominantly via SW), without a viable replacement, galled a lot of rural people.

Another issue was that the recent government of Australia has seemed to have it in for the ABC, and RA was the first on the chopping block.

 

[davideduardo]

I gather that there are a few other broadcasters aiming to fill in the need (some powerful MW station in Emerald, Queensland, which has large nighttime coverage, and another MW of SW station either in QLD or NSW somewhere), but the ABC is supposed to serve the entire population of Australia, and their emphasis on redundant, low-listener DAB in the capital cities at the expense of the rural people in the Outback (predominantly via SW), without a viable replacement, galled a lot of rural people.

Canada has had for many decades a system of low power relays, first on AM and then on FM. The facilities were installed at rail junctions or other "official" sites with connectivity via phone lines or, today, the Internet. That gave local service to many, many remote areas.

Canada probably has more remote areas than Australia, and Canada did not depend significantly on domestic shortwave in the most modern era as they realize that SW is obsolete.

 

[davideduardo]

Radio Australia was a lifeline for many people. Fishermen and maritime people used it. Farmers and ranchers, far from big cities, depended on it. And, it was also good PR for Australia in general.
Government doesn't exist to make profits. If it did, we'd eliminate police, fire, military, etc.
Support was provided to taxpaying citizens and businesses, at a reasonable cost. Now, many are without those valuable services.

This is like asking the government to build a paved road to a place where one family lives. The cost involved would be an unfair burden on the rest of the population. These are cases where the people who live in such places my have to have solar power and batteries, satellite communications and the like... at their expense.

The exception would be if the person involved is providing a valued service to the nation. Otherwise, if they want to live there, they must make their own accomodations

 

[boombox4]

Canada has had for many decades a system of low power relays, first on AM and then on FM. The facilities were installed at rail junctions or other "official" sites with connectivity via phone lines or, today, the Internet. That gave local service to many, many remote areas.

Canada probably has more remote areas than Australia, and Canada did not depend significantly on domestic shortwave in the most modern era as they realize that SW is obsolete.

Their last viable Canadian SW domestic service I'm aware of was the CBC Northern Service, which used to broadcast in native languages, which I think was taken off the air in the 1980's or 1990's, as the CBC installed more FM repeaters and outlets in the Far North.

In most of remote Canada (the far north), the people live in villages where there are FM repeaters. In Oz, there is a lot of cattle ranching in the Outback, far from towns and villages, with no FM repeaters, and even MW coverage is mediocre, if existent, during the daytime. And when the Oz government decided to get rid of RA they didn't have a replacement for it, for the rural people who had been depending on it. No new network of FM repeaters, no LPAM repeaters either. They used that money saved to add DAB in places like Hobart (one of the capital cities), where there already is a plethora of commercial and ABC broadcasters on FM. They basically told the rural farmers and ranchers to get a satellite set-up or just do without.

 

[Kelly A]

In most of remote Canada (the far north), the people live in villages where there are FM repeaters. In Oz, there is a lot of cattle ranching in the Outback, far from towns and villages, with no FM repeaters, and even MW coverage is mediocre, if existent, during the daytime. And when the Oz government decided to get rid of RA they didn't have a replacement for it, for the rural people who had been depending on it. No new network of FM repeaters, no LPAM repeaters either. They used that money saved to add DAB in places like Hobart (one of the capital cities), where there already is a plethora of commercial and ABC broadcasters on FM. They basically told the rural farmers and ranchers to get a satellite set-up or just do without.

As David mentioned; there comes a point where even with government services, the cost of serving huge swaths of real estate with MW or SW isn't a cost effective use of taxpayer dollars. Especially true when the number of listeners in some of the villages have long moved onto some other way to get media where SW and MW listeners in an area are numbered in single digits. Satellite TV has replaced a lot of that.