Which Would You Rather Purchase ?

[700WLW]

"Introducing Internet Table Radio"

http://www.hear2.com/2005/08/introducing_int.html

 

[SaynotoIB0C]

Internet table radios are great but what if I want to listen in my car?

Do I have to find a hot spot and park near it?


With HD I can go almost anywhere and hear it!

 

[700WLW]

Coming soon, brought to you by WiMax - and let's not forget about the new 3G Wireless Internet services, that are already available. HD Radio is already old technology, and is a dead horse, even before it gets out the the starting gates.

 

[IBOCRocks]

Coming soon, brought to you by WiMax - and let's not forget about the new 3G Wireless Internet services, that are already available. HD Radio is already old technology, and is a dead horse, even before it gets out the the starting gates.

I agree that WiMax is a promising technology, but really, you expect me to pay $200 + $45 a month to stream radio...and that's in areas that the carriers deem "profitable". So if you're not in one of those areas, no radio for you!

 

[700WLW]

IBOCRocks: "I agree that WiMax is a promising technology, but really, you expect me to pay $200 + $45 a month to stream radio...and that's in areas that the carriers deem "profitable". So if you're not in one of those areas, no radio for you!"

May be not you, but watch how many will !

 

[IBOCRocks]

IBOCRocks: "I agree that WiMax is a promising technology, but really, you expect me to pay $200 + $45 a month to stream radio...and that's in areas that the carriers deem "profitable". So if you're not in one of those areas, no radio for you!"

May be not you, but watch how many will !

Even if they do, there is nothing indicating that it will be an exclusive purchase, or at the expense of HD or analog radio.

 

[700WLW]

IBOCRocks: "Even if they do, there is nothing indicating that it will be an exclusive purchase, or at the expense of HD or analog radio."

Of course it would be an exclusive purchase ! Internet Radio is a direct comtetitor to HD Radio - Why, would someone buy an HD radio, just to get local stations, when they can have world-wide stations !

 

[IBOCRocks]

IBOCRocks: "Even if they do, there is nothing indicating that it will be an exclusive purchase, or at the expense of HD or analog radio."

Of course it would be an exclusive purchase ! Internet Radio is a direct comtetitor to HD Radio - Why, would someone buy an HD radio, just to get local stations, when they can have world-wide stations !

Internet radio is also a direct competitor to analog radio, CD's, iPods and more. Yet people still buy all of those.

 

[700WLW]

IBOCRocks: "Internet radio is also a direct competitor to analog radio, CD's, iPods and more. Yet people still buy all of those."

But, analog radios are dirt cheap, and iPods are in a totally separate category. Well, just look at the sales figures - no one is spending hundreds for local, junky terrestrial radio.

 

[IBOCRocks]

IBOCRocks: "Internet radio is also a direct competitor to analog radio, CD's, iPods and more. Yet people still buy all of those."

But, analog radios are dirt cheap, and iPods are in a totally separate category. Well, just look at the sales figures - no one is spending hundres for local junky terrestrial radio.

Yes, but you are looking at absolutes. In your mind, HD Radio needs to outsell streaming radios in order to win. That's not true at all. Radio just needs to sell, period. Aside from that, it's wasy to predict that internet "radios" will sell better than analog and HD Radios. 99% of American househoilds have a radio. Maybe 1% have an internet radio. That means sales will be strong on the internet radios, slower on traditional radios.

Second, whether you agree or not, HD Radio is going to make gains as replacement radios. People will not go and buy one if they have a radio they like, but if they need one, HD Radio will be attractive, especially as the prices start to come down.

 

[700WLW]

IBOCRocks: "Second, whether you agree or not, HD Radio is going to make gains as replacement radios. People will not go and buy one if they have a radio they like, but if they need one, HD Radio will be attractive, especially as the prices start to come down."

I disagree - prove it.

IBOCRocks: "Maybe 1% have an internet radio."

I disagreee - prove it.

 

[IBOCRocks]

IBOCRocks: "Second, whether you agree or not, HD Radio is going to make gains as replacement radios. People will not go and buy one if they have a radio they like, but if they need one, HD Radio will be attractive, especially as the prices start to come down."

I disagree - prove it.

IBOCRocks: "Maybe 1% have an internet radio."

I disagreee - prove it.

You know as well as I do that that was an estimate. There is no reason to demand proof, other than to be argumentative.

You're just trying to pick fights again. I'm done with this conversation.

 

[700WLW]

IBOCRocks: "You know as well as I do that that was an estimate. There is no reason to demand proof, other than to be argumentative. You're just trying to pick fights again. I'm done with this conversation."

That 1% was probably WAY underestimated, because that would give HD Radio an advantage. Yes, it is very reasonable to ASK FOR proof, if you are going to make specific estimates. Why is this trying to pick a fight - I was just asking for proof of these figures - don't get so emotional !

 

[IBOCRocks]

IBOCRocks: "You know as well as I do that that was an estimate. There is no reason to demand proof, other than to be argumentative. You're just trying to pick fights again. I'm done with this conversation."

That 1% was probably WAY underestimated, because that would give HD Radio an advantage. Yes, it is very reasonable to ASK FOR proof, if you are going to make specific estimates. Why is this trying to pick a fight - I was just asking for proof of these figures - don't get so emotional !

I don't believe it's way underestimated, but if you want to find the actual number and fill us in, please do!

 

[700WLW]

IBOCRocks: " don't believe it's way underestimated, but if you want to find the actual number and fill us in, please do!"

Why, do you continue this conversation, when you just posted that you were done with this conversation - see, YOU are trying to drag this out, to pick a fight. You still need to back up that 1%, if you are going to post figures - that is YOUR responsibility, not mine. But we all know, where the Bridge Ratings have HD Radio versus Internet Radio/Wireless Internet !

http://www.bridgeratings.com/press_031006-digitalprojectionsupd.htm

BTW, here is your post, where you stated you were done with this conversation:

IBOCRocks: "You know as well as I do that that was an estimate. There is no reason to demand proof, other than to be argumentative. You're just trying to pick fights again. I'm done with this conversation."

BTW, looks like your 1% was a little low for current Internet Radio usage: Bridge Ratings have it at 56.7 million listeners/week versus HD Radio at .56 million/week (if anything, the HD Radio figure is WAY overblown).

See, it is 4:08 PM EST and I just saw your green online light light-up, right after I modified this message !

 

[IBOCRocks]

IBOCRocks: " don't believe it's way underestimated, but if you want to find the actual number and fill us in, please do!"

Why, do you continue this conversation, when you just posted that you were done with this conversation - see, YOU are trying to drag this out, to pick a fight. You still need to back up that 1%, if you are going to post figures - that is YOUR responsibility, not mine. But we all know, where the Bridge Ratings have HD Radio versus Internet Radio/Wireless Internet !

http://www.bridgeratings.com/press_031006-digitalprojectionsupd.htm

BTW, here is your post, where you stated you were done with this conversation:

IBOCRocks: "You know as well as I do that that was an estimate. There is no reason to demand proof, other than to be argumentative. You're just trying to pick fights again. I'm done with this conversation."

I was, but you asked a legitimate question, so I answered.

All you're trying to do now is fight. Let it go...

 

[700WLW]

IBOCRocks: "I was, but you asked a legitimate question, so I answered. All you're trying to do now is fight. Let it go..."

All I was doing was to answer your statements/questions, and back them up with facts - who said, I was trying to fight. As I previously pointed out, you stated that you were done with conversation, but that was about three replys ago, but you keep replying, even though, in my last post, I didn't pose any questions, or was expecting a reply. If you would stop replying, and trying to pick fights, then we could let this go, but you always seem to have to have the last post.

 

[IBOCRocks]

...but you always seem to have to have the last post.

Which is, ironically, what you're doing here. Posting statements after I move on, trying to bait me into arguing. Looking at several threads here, you follow my post with some sort of angry or rude comment, then when I try to defend myself from your attack you tell me that I won't leave you alone.

Don't reply to my posts if you don't want me to reply to you.

If you would calm down and not be so angry, we might have a constructive conversation.

 

[700WLW]

IBOCRocks: "Which is, ironically, what you're doing here. Posting statements after I move on, trying to bait me into arguing. Looking at several threads here, you follow my post with some sort of angry or rude comment, then when I try to defend myself from your attack you tell me that I won't leave you alone.Don't reply to my posts if you don't want me to reply to you.If you would calm down and not be so angry, we might have a constructive conversation"

But you stated, now FOUR replys ago, that you were done with this conversation, but you keep replying and trying to pick fights. My last post didn't ask any questions, or was expecting a reply, but you always seem to have to have the last post, which most people would say is trying to pick a fight. If you think I am trying to bait you, then why are you taking the bait. There are no rude statements in my last post - you are just being unnecessarily sensitive. I started this thread originally, so that puts you as the follower, as always the last to reply/post. There were no attacks against you, personally, in my last post, but you take anything negative about IBOC, as a personal attack. I did not attack you, so you have nothing to defend, personally so see, you just have to be the last one to reply, so you can pick fights. And again, you accuse me of being angry, which you can't back up with facts, so stop making accusations you can't back up with facts. Now, we can't believe anything you say anymore, because you can't keep your word, that you were done with this conversation, four posts ago.

 

[IBOCRocks]

IBOCRocks: " don't believe it's way underestimated, but if you want to find the actual number and fill us in, please do!"

Why, do you continue this conversation, when you just posted that you were done with this conversation - see, YOU are trying to drag this out, to pick a fight. You still need to back up that 1%, if you are going to post figures - that is YOUR responsibility, not mine. But we all know, where the Bridge Ratings have HD Radio versus Internet Radio/Wireless Internet !

http://www.bridgeratings.com/press_031006-digitalprojectionsupd.htm

BTW, here is your post, where you stated you were done with this conversation:

IBOCRocks: "You know as well as I do that that was an estimate. There is no reason to demand proof, other than to be argumentative. You're just trying to pick fights again. I'm done with this conversation."

BTW, looks like your 1% was a little low for current Internet Radio usage: Bridge Ratings have it at 56.7 million listeners/week versus HD Radio at .56 million/week (if anything, the HD Radio figure is WAY overblown).

See, it is 4:08 PM EST and I just saw your green online light light-up, right after I modified this message !

First of all, nice job editing your post after I leave. Seriously, your cyber-stalking makes me nervous.

Anyway, I never said internet radio USAGE was 1%. Let's look at the quote:

"Maybe 1% have an internet radio."

As in the physical radio, like the rocku. So you misunderstood me. Wouldn't be the first time. See - you will do anything to start a fight! You could have politely asked for a clarification, but instead you attack me and accuse me of logging in while you post (which is disturbing to say the least).

As for starting an argument, I am replying to your attack. Again, why are you so angry with me? It is because I have a difference of opinion?

Anyway, I would appreciate it if you'd stop monitoring how I spend my time here, it's un-nerving.