• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

The HD Radio "alliance"

N

neanderpol

Guest
It's my understanding that most of the big radio corps have unified on the HD broadcasting initiatives.

Isn't this collusion?

And what other businesses would agree to not use their new outlets to NOT attempt to take business away from competitors?

This whole thing smacks of some small broadcaster filing suit.

Thoughts?
 
> It's my understanding that most of the big radio corps have
> unified on the HD broadcasting initiaves.
>
> Isn't this collusion?
>

Possibly, but I would assume the structure would be set up to avoid breaking any actual laws.


> And what other businesses would agree to not use their new
> outlets to NOT attempt to take business away from
> competitors?
>
> This whole thing smacks of some small broadcaster filing
> suit.
>
> Thoughts?
>

I think in a lot of ways it makes sense...there's no way any given market can suddenly support three or four new stations (which is essentially what these multicast HD channels are) all having the same format. So instead of yet again getting less diversity on the air, these station owners are loosely cooperating to get MORE diversity on the radio. The owners know they need to do everything they can to get more people interested in buying HD Radio-equipped tuners. How else will they see a return on their $75k-to-$150k-per-transmitter investment?

Rest assured, though...this is a temporary measure. Once HD Radio gets more established (at least on FM) and more receivers are on the market...the need for this alliance will fade fast and they'll be back at each other's throats. :)
 
> It's my understanding that most of the big radio corps have
> unified on the HD broadcasting initiaves.
>
> Isn't this collusion?
>
> And what other businesses would agree to not use their new
> outlets to NOT attempt to take business away from
> competitors?
>
> This whole thing smacks of some small broadcaster filing
> suit.
>
> Thoughts?
>
Yeah, my thought is that perhaps you'd have found something negative with it anyway. If not for the companies getting together on it HD radio would meet certain doom, just like AM Stereo did, because there'd be no motivation for companies to switch to it. Now, they've given the manufacturers a reason to produce the receivers. I am more postive about HD radio today than I was just a week ago.
 
> Yeah, my thought is that perhaps you'd have found something
> negative with it anyway. If not for the companies getting
> together on it HD radio would meet certain doom, just like
> AM Stereo did, because there'd be no motivation for
> companies to switch to it. Now, they've given the
> manufacturers a reason to produce the receivers. I am more
> postive about HD radio today than I was just a week ago.

When they manufacture an HD radio that also includes an analog C-Quam AM Stereo option, I'll scrounge the money together to buy one.
 
> > It's my understanding that most of the big radio corps
> have
> > unified on the HD broadcasting initiaves.
> >
> > Isn't this collusion?
> >
>
> Possibly, but I would assume the structure would be set up
> to avoid breaking any actual laws.

It is collusion to a certain extent. If only the industry had enough backbone to uniformly stand up to the FCC as well as the NY Attorney General in this stupid pay for play "scandal"...

I am glad they did it though because TV took way too long to come up with a uniform standard for HD. I first saw HDTV in 1981!
>
>
> > And what other businesses would agree to not use their new
>
> > outlets to NOT attempt to take business away from
> > competitors?
> >
> > This whole thing smacks of some small broadcaster filing
> > suit.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
There are similar agreements when it comes to ownership of sports teams so as not to step on the toes of other owners. For example, the NFL will only allow ownership of another major league franchise as long as it is the NFL owners current market. this way, the Krafts could not own the DC Nationals and not damage Daniel Snyder's holdings with the Redskins.

However, given radio's copy cat nature, I am sure that if Clear Channel had success with some new format, then CBS would copy it right away given the right market circumstances.
>
> I think in a lot of ways it makes sense...there's no way any
> given market can suddenly support three or four new stations
> (which is essentially what these multicast HD channels are)
> all having the same format. So instead of yet again
> getting less diversity on the air, these station owners are
> loosely cooperating to get MORE diversity on the radio.
> The owners know they need to do everything they can to get
> more people interested in buying HD Radio-equipped tuners.
> How else will they see a return on their
> $75k-to-$150k-per-transmitter investment?
>
> Rest assured, though...this is a temporary measure. Once HD
> Radio gets more established (at least on FM) and more
> receivers are on the market...the need for this alliance
> will fade fast and they'll be back at each other's throats.
> :)
>
 
> > It's my understanding that most of the big radio corps
> have
> > unified on the HD broadcasting initiaves.
> >
> > Isn't this collusion?
> >
> > And what other businesses would agree to not use their new
>
> > outlets to NOT attempt to take business away from
> > competitors?
> >
> > This whole thing smacks of some small broadcaster filing
> > suit.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> Yeah, my thought is that perhaps you'd have found something
> negative with it anyway. If not for the companies getting
> together on it HD radio would meet certain doom, just like
> AM Stereo did, because there'd be no motivation for
> companies to switch to it. Now, they've given the
> manufacturers a reason to produce the receivers. I am more
> postive about HD radio today than I was just a week ago.
>

The only thing that might be a negative really is the splitting of available cume.

I've asked several people in management positions of several companies how their companies plan to deal with inevitable cume attrition, and nobody has an answer.

I think, in the absence of deeper playlists, these outlets are great. But, we haven't quite figured out how to stop the bleeding from the primary signals yet, and now have offered the listener 3 times the amount of choices.

Great for the audience. Potentially devastating to stand-alone broadcasters, and the financial bottom line for us all.

Other than that...this COULD equal more jobs.

..and everyone knows we all love that.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom