Video clip of WOAI AM HD 60 miles

[Chuck]

Last I knew iBiquity imposes an annual license fee for IBOC on any station, AM or FM. If you don't keep up your license fee payments, entering some kind of authorization code, your HD importer quits.

No, the way IBOC works is the following. The owner of an AM facility buys a license which is good for the life of the encoder. There are no annual fees for AM or FM stand alone encoders. The onmly time additional fees occure are either when a facility is sold to a new owner (the new owner pays that lifetime license fee) or pn FM when multicasting occurs.

Stations shouldn't have to pay a license fee. Without them, there is no reason to by radios. Ibiquity, or anybody else is entitled to a reasonable royalty on radios sold that can receive new technology. Unfortunately, you need something to listen to, in order to sell those radios. Even RCA, which was a fairly cutthroat operation, understood that concept very well.

Ibiquity is showing their greed by charging stations. They should be grateful that somebody is willing to buy the equipment to transmit HD. The license should go along with the purchase of equipment. If they were really smart, they'd ship every licensed broadcaster in the USA a free HD encoder. That is the way to get this thing off the ground. I suspect their own greed, not the flawed technology, will lead to their ultimate demise.

 

[R.F. Burns]

Chuck, I believe if every station owned by CC/CBS Radio and the other large broadcasters turned on IBOC exciters the technology would survive. While I agree with you about licensing fees (and even on radio manufacturers there has to be an end to paying licensing fees as we've discussed elsewhere) I don't think that getting IBOC into small stations or translators will have any effect on whether this technology succeeds or not.

 

[Savage]

Clouseau, I retract my earlier comment - I was apparently misinformed. RF, what happens when updated encoders come out? It's my understanding that there have been several upgrades requiring new circuitry, perhaps second and third-generation encoders, and that iBiquity is quite insistent about stations installing the upgrades. Is a new license fee required in this case?

I understand also that the licensing fees are not insignificant, even if they're not recurring.

 

[R.F. Burns]

Clouseau, I retract my earlier comment - I was apparently misinformed. RF, what happens when updated encoders come out? It's my understanding that there have been several upgrades requiring new circuitry, perhaps second and third-generation encoders, and that iBiquity is quite insistent about stations installing the upgrades. Is a new license fee required in this case?

I understand also that the licensing fees are not insignificant, even if they're not recurring.

Bob, I'd have to ask and get back to you on that.

 

[clouseau]

I understand also that the licensing fees are not insignificant, even if they're not recurring.

I would characterize that as a VERY correct statement. They are definitly NOT "Insignificant".

Clouseau

 

[Chuck]

I understand also that the licensing fees are not insignificant, even if they're not recurring.

If memory serves me, I think my latest offer from Ibiquity was for a "special" license fee in the $14,000 - 15,000 range. The pitch was “get it before the price goes up.” That fee is for a station with an ERP of 74 watts. It makes zero economic sense.

We also broadcast on three translators. I didn't bother to ask how they would be licensed, however Fanfare/Crown makes a translator that avoids the license fee by never demodulating the signal. That's nice if it works, but using Fanfare receivers right now, I have enough trouble getting the analog signal to work in well in stereo. Adding HD to the mix would probably make for an impossible situation. To a station with a very small operating budget, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out.

To the large broadcast companies, the fees are just "chump change." They'd probably blow more than the fee on just one poorly conceived promotion. To anyone less than a major market flamethrower, the fees are quite significant. Perhaps the growing disparity between large and small broadcasters is one of the general problems in broadcasting right now and maybe a really specific problem in the HD debate.

You have a lot of "giants" who own the choice stations in the major markets. To them adding HD is no big deal. The next tier are the mid-range guys, who typically own several small clusters that serve mid to small size markets like Kalamazoo, Michigan or Tyler, Texas. These companies usually do fairly well, but paying the license fee for all of the stations in their cluster is a bigger nut to crack. Add to that the cost of actually upgrading their equipment and we're talking some significant cash from their perspective. Will their return on investment be significant enough to make this worth while? At least, right now, the answer is probably "no." There is also the uncertainty that the FCC might actually approve a higher IBOC signal level, so who wants to buy equipment now that may have to be replaced in the foreseeable future?

Then there are the third tier stations which, for sake of argument, include small "mom & pop" AM & FM stations, LPFM and translators. If you are 1000 watts, running a 10 watt digital signal makes little sense, unless you are doing it for reasons of scientific discovery. It probably won't get you a single new listener.

Although it has been acknowledged that the major markets are the only ones worth fooling with to make a lot of money, there are still a quite a few people, and a lot of stations that don't fall into that category. Some of them are even successful in their own right. I doubt Ibiquity will be able to sell their technology to any of these folks. I don't have exact numbers, but I think in round figures, there are about 4500 small, full power stations, 800 LPFMs and around 3500 translators on the air right now. There are a lot more translators coming on line very soon. In round figures, that is 9000 customers out of the potential 13,000 stations that probably will never adopt the technology, unless something radically changes.

If they number of HD programming sources remains small, I think you will find that the public's general interest will remain small as well. It sounds like AM stereo all over again.

 

[R.F. Burns]

I understand also that the licensing fees are not insignificant, even if they're not recurring.

If memory serves me, I think my latest offer from Ibiquity was for a "special" license fee in the $14,000 - 15,000 range. The pitch was “get it before the price goes up.” That fee is for a station with an ERP of 74 watts. It makes zero economic sense.

We also broadcast on three translators. I didn't bother to ask how they would be licensed, however Fanfare/Crown makes a translator that avoids the license fee by never demodulating the signal. That's nice if it works, but using Fanfare receivers right now, I have enough trouble getting the analog signal to work in well in stereo. Adding HD to the mix would probably make for an impossible situation. To a station with a very small operating budget, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out.

To the large broadcast companies, the fees are just "chump change." They'd probably blow more than the fee on just one poorly conceived promotion. To anyone less than a major market flamethrower, the fees are quite significant. Perhaps the growing disparity between large and small broadcasters is one of the general problems in broadcasting right now and maybe a really specific problem in the HD debate.

You have a lot of "giants" who own the choice stations in the major markets. To them adding HD is no big deal. The next tier are the mid-range guys, who typically own several small clusters that serve mid to small size markets like Kalamazoo, Michigan or Tyler, Texas. These companies usually do fairly well, but paying the license fee for all of the stations in their cluster is a bigger nut to crack. Add to that the cost of actually upgrading their equipment and we're talking some significant cash from their perspective. Will their return on investment be significant enough to make this worth while? At least, right now, the answer is probably "no." There is also the uncertainty that the FCC might actually approve a higher IBOC signal level, so who wants to buy equipment now that may have to be replaced in the foreseeable future?

Then there are the third tier stations which, for sake of argument, include small "mom & pop" AM & FM stations, LPFM and translators. If you are 1000 watts, running a 10 watt digital signal makes little sense, unless you are doing it for reasons of scientific discovery. It probably won't get you a single new listener.

Although it has been acknowledged that the major markets are the only ones worth fooling with to make a lot of money, there are still a quite a few people, and a lot of stations that don't fall into that category. Some of them are even successful in their own right. I doubt Ibiquity will be able to sell their technology to any of these folks. I don't have exact numbers, but I think in round figures, there are about 4500 small, full power stations, 800 LPFMs and around 3500 translators on the air right now. There are a lot more translators coming on line very soon. In round figures, that is 9000 customers out of the potential 13,000 stations that probably will never adopt the technology, unless something radically changes.

If they number of HD programming sources remains small, I think you will find that the public's general interest will remain small as well. It sounds like AM stereo all over again.

Its way too early for translator owners to even think about IBOC. Translators are probably years off before they need to consider digital service. Actually the 14 K isn't bad considering that Kahn wants that kind of money for his Cam'D and there are no radios to receive his system.

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

Clouseau, I retract my earlier comment - I was apparently misinformed. RF, what happens when updated encoders come out? It's my understanding that there have been several upgrades requiring new circuitry, perhaps second and third-generation encoders, and that iBiquity is quite insistent about stations installing the upgrades. Is a new license fee required in this case?

I understand also that the licensing fees are not insignificant, even if they're not recurring.

iBiquity's "Fact Sheet" on licensing:

http://www.ibiquity.com/i/pdfs/Licensing_ Fact_ Sheet_2008.pdf

 

[Chuck]

Its way too early for translator owners to even think about IBOC. Translators are probably years off before they need to consider digital service. Actually the 14 K isn't bad considering that Kahn wants that kind of money for his Cam'D and there are no radios to receive his system.

I agree that it is way too soon for translators and LPFM, but Ibiquity is soliciting licensing anyway. I guess they need them money and figure that maybe one out of five hundred might take the bait. I am lead to believe that Kahn's system gives you some "black box" electronics for the money. Ibiquity just gives you the right to purchase a lot more equipment for their $15,000. At least, Kahn's stuff might make a good doorstop.

For about $8500, FMExtra gives you everything you need except for receivers.

 

[vsa]

Its way too early for translator owners to even think about IBOC. Translators are probably years off before they need to consider digital service. Actually the 14 K isn't bad considering that Kahn wants that kind of money for his Cam'D and there are no radios to receive his system.

I agree that it is way too soon for translators and LPFM, but Ibiquity is soliciting licensing anyway. I guess they need them money and figure that maybe one out of five hundred might take the bait. I am lead to believe that Kahn's system gives you some "black box" electronics for the money. Ibiquity just gives you the right to purchase a lot more equipment for their $15,000. At least, Kahn's stuff might make a good doorstop.

For about $8500, FMExtra gives you everything you need except for receivers.

With Internet radio, for the price of a used computer, free software, the cost of bandwidth, etc., you have a worldwide digital signal with zero interference and zero need to sell specialized receivers that nobody wants.

Of course, you could decide to invest more money, as some people are now doing. Read Mark Ramsey on "The New Face of Internet Radio."

http://www.hear2.com/2008/02/the-new-face-of.html

 

[R.F. Burns]

Its way too early for translator owners to even think about IBOC. Translators are probably years off before they need to consider digital service. Actually the 14 K isn't bad considering that Kahn wants that kind of money for his Cam'D and there are no radios to receive his system.

I agree that it is way too soon for translators and LPFM, but Ibiquity is soliciting licensing anyway. I guess they need them money and figure that maybe one out of five hundred might take the bait. I am lead to believe that Kahn's system gives you some "black box" electronics for the money. Ibiquity just gives you the right to purchase a lot more equipment for their $15,000. At least, Kahn's stuff might make a good doorstop.

For about $8500, FMExtra gives you everything you need except for receivers.

With Internet radio, for the price of a used computer, free software, the cost of bandwidth, etc., you have a worldwide digital signal with zero interference and zero need to sell specialized receivers that nobody wants.

Of course, you could decide to invest more money, as some people are now doing. Read Mark Ramsey on "The New Face of Internet Radio."

http://www.hear2.com/2008/02/the-new-face-of.html

Mark Ramsey has opinons, you have opinions, I have opinions. SO WHAT! You can keep repeating the mantra but its going to be years before Wi-Fi covers more than small geographic areas of this country. For those of us who aren't shut ins, the promise of internet radio is no answer in todays world. For the DXers amongst us remember, when Wi-Fi takes over DXing dies completely. JRC has stopped producing radios for SW & BCB Dxing, who's next?

 

[rbrucecarter5]

Mark Ramsey has opinons, you have opinions, I have opinions. SO WHAT! You can keep repeating the mantra but its going to be years before Wi-Fi covers more than small geographic areas of this country. For those of us who aren't shut ins, the promise of internet radio is no answer in todays world. For the DXers amongst us remember, when Wi-Fi takes over DXing dies completely. JRC has stopped producing radios for SW & BCB Dxing, who's next?

Uh - you are forgetting cell phones. Those networks are already built out, and a small change like putting bluetooth in the phone, and you got internet radio in the car - all it will take is a bluetooth enable car radio. Combined with flat rate for internet access plans from the providers, and everybody is carrying around a streaming device that will work in any populated area and along most major highways. The moment the cell phone companies realize there is a market for streaming - its a done deal.

 

[R.F. Burns]

Mark Ramsey has opinons, you have opinions, I have opinions. SO WHAT! You can keep repeating the mantra but its going to be years before Wi-Fi covers more than small geographic areas of this country. For those of us who aren't shut ins, the promise of internet radio is no answer in todays world. For the DXers amongst us remember, when Wi-Fi takes over DXing dies completely. JRC has stopped producing radios for SW & BCB Dxing, who's next?

Uh - you are forgetting cell phones. Those networks are already built out, and a small change like putting bluetooth in the phone, and you got internet radio in the car - all it will take is a bluetooth enable car radio. Combined with flat rate for internet access plans from the providers, and everybody is carrying around a streaming device that will work in any populated area and along most major highways. The moment the cell phone companies realize there is a market for streaming - its a done deal.

Can you tell me which cell company can provide high bandwidth data to cell phones within its coverage area? Why does the audio quality of my Verizon cell phone become poor when I move away from cell sites? Even in my town which is where the NE's Verizon wireless headquaters is located there are areas without cell coverage. Oh and how about the fact that my street which is maybe 5 miles from the Verizon site, they don't offer DSL (My developement is about 20 years old) let alone VIOS. That's in a heavily populated NYC suburban area. Oh and what about those who can't afford a monthly subscription. What do you say to them? Your looking at the world as though everyone has disposable income and isn't living paycheck to paycheck. Time for a reality check. Radio is free, all of these other devices you suggest come along with a monthly fee. Have you checked the stock market today? The dow was doen over 300 points. Yep, it's a great time to take on another bill.

 

[vsa]

Mark Ramsey has opinons, you have opinions, I have opinions. SO WHAT! You can keep repeating the mantra but its going to be years before Wi-Fi covers more than small geographic areas of this country. For those of us who aren't shut ins, the promise of internet radio is no answer in todays world. For the DXers amongst us remember, when Wi-Fi takes over DXing dies completely. JRC has stopped producing radios for SW & BCB Dxing, who's next?

Uh - you are forgetting cell phones.  Those networks are already built out, and a small change like putting bluetooth in the phone, and you got internet radio in the car - all it will take is a bluetooth enable car radio.  Combined with flat rate for internet access plans from the providers, and everybody is carrying around a streaming device that will work in any populated area and along most major highways.  The moment the cell phone companies realize there is a market for streaming - its a done deal.

Can you tell me which cell company can provide high bandwidth data to cell phones within its coverage area? Why does the audio quality of my Verizon cell phone become poor when I move away from cell sites? Even in my town which is where the NE's Verizon wireless headquaters is located there are areas without cell coverage. Oh and how about the fact that my street which is maybe 5 miles from the Verizon site, they don't offer DSL (My developement is about 20 years old) let alone VIOS. That's in a heavily populated NYC suburban area. Oh and what about those who can't afford a monthly subscription. What do you say to them? Your looking at the world as though everyone has disposable income and isn't living paycheck to paycheck. Time for a reality check. Radio is free, all of these other devices you suggest come along with a monthly fee. Have you checked the stock market today? The dow was doen over 300 points. Yep, it's a great time to take on another bill.

Verizon Wireless and Sprint offer EVDO, and increasingly each month, EVDO Rev. A which is much faster. I'm leaving out AT&T slower EDGE wireless service. Starting this spring in Chicago, Baltimore and Washington. D.C. with more cities to be added, Sprint is unveiling it's XOHM WiMAX service. It won't take long to blanket the nation one entire city at a time. This is a wireless service with a greater range than prior technologies, so the rollout will be pretty fast.

WiMAX will deliver true high speed broadband with expected speeds of 2-4 mega bits per second for downloads and 1-3 mega bits per second for uploads for about $40 a month. That's fast enough to replace your broadband cable or DSL service and also your cell phone service if you run something like VOIP or Skype. You'll get stationary, portable and mobile service and save money in the process. So much for being "unaffordable."

There's your reality check!

http://www.xohm.com/advantages.html

http://www.xohm.com/coming-soon.html

 

[R.F. Burns]

For the millions living on the edge due to out fabulous economy, $40 extra a month is too much. No matter, terrestrial radio is still very healthy and continue to be for many years. Why is it that television stations continue to broadcast over the air when cable has beeen around for so many years?

 

[Chuck]

For the millions living on the edge due to out fabulous economy, $40 extra a month is too much. No matter, terrestrial radio is still very healthy and continue to be for many years. Why is it that television stations continue to broadcast over the air when cable has beeen around for so many years?

Actually, R.F. for many people, that $40 per month will be INSTEAD of the $50-60 per month they are already spending. A lot of people will probably want it because it is cheaper. The fact that it is also better will be icing on the cake.

 

[R.F. Burns]

For the millions living on the edge due to out fabulous economy, $40 extra a month is too much. No matter, terrestrial radio is still very healthy and continue to be for many years. Why is it that television stations continue to broadcast over the air when cable has beeen around for so many years?

Actually, R.F. for many people, that $40 per month will be INSTEAD of the $50-60 per month they are already spending. A lot of people will probably want it because it is cheaper. The fact that it is also better will be icing on the cake.

Chuck, I'll believe it when I see it. The economy is in the dumps and there's no sign of a turn around for the foreseable future. That and the fact that neccessary costs keep rising;

http://www.panynj.gov/CommutingTravel/bridges/html/tolls.html

Yep, 8 dollars just to cross the river to work each day. That doesn't include the 3 dollar a gallon gas (Jersey gas is amongst the cheapest. In NY gas is 3.40 or more a gallon for reg) and the 15 dollar daily parking cost. $40 a month for unlimited wireless internet? Is that the new HMO? C'mon sign up, its only $40 a month, but wait awhile and soon the $40 becomes $100 and more. In my part of the country, nothing has gone down. Even my DirecTv monthly charges have risen over time.

 

[Chuck]

Yep, 8 dollars just to cross the river to work each day. That doesn't include the 3 dollar a gallon gas (Jersey gas is amongst the cheapest. In NY gas is 3.40 or more a gallon for reg) and the 15 dollar daily parking cost. $40 a month for unlimited wireless internet? Is that the new HMO? C'mon sign up, its only $40 a month, but wait awhile and soon the $40 becomes $100 and more. In my part of the country, nothing has gone down. Even my DirecTv monthly charges have risen over time.

Except for artificially inflated home prices, nothing has gone down in price anywhere. The truth of the matter is your dollar is next to worthless. Just go to Europe and you will see what I mean. Any European city makes NYC seem like a bargain. There are lots of reasons for that, but not the topic for this board.

On the other hand, I'm old enough to remember when the some New York area bridge tolls were an astounding 50 cents. (I think I remember George Washington was 25 cents in the 50’s, but I wasn’t driving then.) Put in perspective, if $8.00 today buys what 50 cents did back then, that would make $40 Internet service look like quite a bargain. It would be $2.50 in "real money."

Maybe you won't be one of the people who subscribes to a $40 wireless Internet service, but lots of people will.

 

[Tom Wells]

Yep, 8 dollars just to cross the river to work each day. That doesn't include the 3 dollar a gallon gas (Jersey gas is amongst the cheapest. In NY gas is 3.40 or more a gallon for reg)

It's always free on the outbound side, isn't it?

I love buying gas in Jersey, it's cheaper to have someone pump it for me, than self serv in Chicago!

I sure can see my dollars becoming more and more devalued, I'm livin' and dyin' on overtime. What's a savings?

Thank goodness this internet connex is paid by my employer, and the other one here at home is free neighborhood wifi probably from the university.
I've been paying the Al Gore Internet tax on my landline since 1992 or so, and feel entitled to use of this unlocked wifi.

I am paying for one wireless account for my wife's laptop on a T-Mobile card. No cable, No DSL.

 

[Chuck]

I have a friend in Florida who is in the wireless Internet business. He is quite interesting to talk to. His business model is a bit out of the ordinary. There service is FREE. He has thousands and thousands of subscribers. None of them pay for the service (although I think they pay a modest one time charge for the radio/modem). It is advertiser supported and making money.

Yeah, he is a little guy. It is not Sprint or AT&T we are talking about, but it seems to be working for him. I suspect it also works for his subscribers and sponsors. There is no argument that this is an unusual approach, but I think it may be the wave of the future. The Internet is just getting started. There will be bumps along the road, but we'll eventually get past them.