-
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
WiMax the best way for broadcasters to get their (HD) programming into cars?
- Thread starter SUPERCASTER
- Start date
Chuck said:
Yea, quite the bargain when you combine it with my monthly 2,400 mortgauge (which includes taxes) and my 3 or 400$ utility bill, and my 50$ internet bill and the 65$ for DirecTV and my 50$ phone bill and don't forget the four cell phones which total over 110$ a month and food for teh family and the cost of two pets for food and vet bills (our dog has allergies and her food is over 72$ for a 35 pound bag, she's a 75 pound labradore) and of course the car insurance which is well over 1,400$ a year, oh and I nearly forgot E-Z Pass for getting to work 80$ a month and parking in NYC 15$ a day and gas for my car and then there are our two children both in private college and on and on. I nearly forgot my monthly medicine bills, for cholesterol meds etc. Yea, bring on another bill. I just can't get enough of them. Most Americans have had enough when it comes to those extra bills. Why do yiou think satllite radio is basically failing. (By the way, I only provided a partial list of my monthly bills, but I think I've gotten my point across here).
tripinva said:
And Wi-Max will replace all of my internet needs? Where did you come up with the 30 dollar monthly charge? If they can do that I'll sign up tomorrow. Where can I do that now?
vsa said:
Well, the commute from Longview TX to NYC might be a bit rough for me. Let's see where the two towns stand as far as what it will take to get the infrastucture in place.
Longview with a population of 73 or 74 thousand vs NYC with a population of over 8 million people (remeber this isn't the entire region, this is on the five boroughs) Longview is approx 55 square miles, NYC is 470 square miles and again this is just land area of the boroughs, no water or suburbs. Longview has one area code, NYC has five. Now I'll admit NY is at one extreme when it comes to infrastucture needs, however, it is also where most of the population lves. Just to cover the north eastern US will take years to put into place. All of these other delivery methods are great for the future but I live in 2008 and they haven't even started on getting this technology in place in NYC, let alone the region. The new World Trade Center which will reach a height of 1776 feet won't be completed until 2011 at the earliest and it's far easier to construct a single sky scraper than it is to install seamless wi-fi through the most populous part of the United States. Let's talk in 2015 and see where we are. Something tells me we still won't have inexpensive wi-fi by that time.
R.F. Burns said:
Sprint intends to offer WiMax this year in Boston, Philadelphia, Providence, Washington DC, and 15 other cities:
http://www.physorg.com/news94216236.html
Some other key phrases from this article:
"The intellectual property royalties for WiMAX are relatively cheap compared to other technologies... which will help foster plenty of WiMAX development." "The Internet is an open model, and we are following an open model"
Compare this philosophy with the proprietary approach iBiquity has taken.
Companies like Sprint can't even provide seamless cell phone coverage and they've had years to work on that technology. What companies promise and what they achieve are usually two different things.
R.F. Burns said:
That's why I said I view HD as an interim measure at best. Wi-Max may or may not be the ultimate solution, but something like it is fairly certain to be common place in the not so distant future, even in the Big Apple. Seamless two way wireless access for communications, information, entertainment and data is where we are going. I think most people will acknowledge that. The problem for radio is HD doesn't fit into that picture because it is not two way.
The question then is what "side trips" do you want to take on the way to your ultimate destination? HD is an expensive side trip that seems to create as many problems as it solves.
Not for the consumer it isn't expensive. As more radios are produced the licensing fees and other costs will drop. I'm not denying that some other means of digital deleivery might come on board in 10 years or so (and if you think it'll be less you are only deceiving yourself) Radio must do something between now and when that inevitability actually exists. At the moment the answer is HD.
R.F. Burns said:
Those "ten years" will fly by in record time. Ridiculous quantities of 3G handsets weren't the only things showed off at this year's Mobile World Congress in Barcelona...NetIndex, Kaga Electronics and Runcom shook up the norm a bit with their WiMAX-enabled portable VoIP phone...and aside from "realizing all-IP voice communication," it also sports a web browser and integrated WiFi for times when a plain ole hotspot will do..."
http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2008/...oip-phone-showcased-at-mobile-world-congress/
vsa said:
Great, we'll all sit in a circle and sing Kuumba Ya until Wi-Max is ready to be rolled ouot. At this rate AM radio in most markets won't exist in 10 years. Not those which depend on agency buys anyway.
R.F. Burns said:
It will not take long to roll out WIMAX. It's wireless. Sprint is rolling it out this year and next. Others will be following later after the current 700 mHz auction is done. Products for WIMAX are alreday being developed.
There are three kinds of people in the world: (1) those who make things happen, (2) those who watch things happen, and (3) those who wonder what happened.
I fall into group (1). Ask yourself which one are you.
R.F. Burns said:
I'll bet that only the major AM stations actually rely on agency buys as their primary source if income. That's the same 250-300 or so that David Eduardo refers to as “the only really viable AM stations.” I see his point. The rest of the 3500-4000 AM's have a much more grass-roots sales plan which has little or nothing to do with agencies. It is called “pounding the pavement.” You can still make a good living by doing it.
If you detect there is some kind of parallel relationship between the stations that rely mostly on agency buys for their bread and butter, and the stations that are trying to push AM IBOC, you might find some remarkable similarities. On many levels, AM IBOC seems to be good for the big stations and bad for the small stations. It is very convenient. Imagine that.
By the way, you might want to check out Guy Wire’s latest on this weeks “Leslie Report.” It is an interesting read. Sorry, I don’t have a link handy, but it shouldn’t be too hard to find.
and I'd bet that those 300 or 400 stations have a higher annual income than the 3500 remaining stations combinied. What we have here is major market vs small or unrated market radio stations. I think its a fair assumption that the numbers of people served by major & medium market outlets exceeeds all of the small or unrated markets combined. Geographic size is unimportant in this case. That's why they're major markets, its where the vast majority of the audience is.
R.F. Burns said:
I'm reasonably sure you are right about how the money filters down. Since your bread appears to be buttered by a large broadcast interest, it is easy to understand your point of view. If, on the other hand, you were owner of a small but still profitable station, you might have a different opinion about things. Those "little people" have every much as right to make a living as you do.
R
rbrucecarter5
Guest
R.F. Burns said:
When HD-2 solves the diversity problem, then I'll believe it will be the savior of radio. Let me explain what I mean by diversity ---
When I sit at my computer - I've got my list of 4 or 5 streams I log into. I can listen for hours, because they are exactly what I want to hear. Stations from different parts of the country. The problem is - everybody else has their list, and they are all different stations. To attract us away from streaming, HD-2 has to offer the same diversity of formats. Which it can't. There are thousands of streams out there, everybody listening to different ones. Even if you hit my half dozen or so favorite formats, you only get me as a listener. And you probably are irrelevant to everybody else - maybe even make some people mad who really hate my formats. Even satellite is a major disappointment to me because they kept cutting the spectrum down and the number of channels down. What should have been thousands of choices to about 300 - assuming the merger goes through and duplication is eliminated. Better than three dozen HD-2 choices, but it is streaming that really intrigues me. If they can find some way of delivering it reliably through satellite to cars anywhere - HD radio is finished, and so is satellite. Wireless terrestrial delivery only in metro areas would be bad enough, because those are the areas that have HD radio. And 80% of listeners. When streaming becomes available everywhere, it won't be the end of radio. I'm listening to radio stations - KKOB Albuquerque. WAYF Ft. Lauderdale. WPOZ Orlando. One of the WAY-FM's in Denver. Some other stations for other formats. Whatever I'm in the mood for. I'm hearing their commercials. A fair number of those commercials are now for nationally available products and chains. So the ad model for radio will have to move away from local ads to national is all. For every station that loses listeners locally to streaming, they may gain even more listening to their stream. Unless they suck like most big corporate stations. The real winners may well be those little mom and pop operations playing some peculiar niche that may be only marginally successful locally, but when they stream they have a national audience. If there are enough people wanting German polka format - and somebody is playing it - they will get every person in the country who likes that format, and probably have a viable audience base. The only ones with something to lose are the big radio corporations, the same ones who push HD. The Genie is out of the bottle. Its too late. Embrace streaming or die - its just that simple. People will listen to whatever they want - not what program directors and lawyers want them to hear. In a very short period of time, they will have the ability to listen to anything anywhere.
D
dbdigital
Guest
R.F. Burns said:
In a guest editorial, Bob Bellin made this point:
"1) The public has shown little interest in HD Radio. HD Radio was the biggest radio advertiser in 2007 and roughly 350,000 units were sold. By comparison, Sirius added over 900,000 in Q4 of 2006 alone, with a far less advertising support. At the rate HD Radio was adopted in 2007, it would take over 15 years to equal the current critical mass of Satellite radio."
http://textpattern.kurthanson.com/articles/266/guest-editorial-consumers-wall-street-not-buying-hd
So even if your prediction of ten years is right (and I think you're way off, I say less then five years), WiMax use will still outpace HD Radio in growth.
The tremendous success of the iPhone (and BTW, iPhone users are also the highest users of mobile internet) proves that this is what the public wants, not a redundant box that receives what they already hear but in digital form.
db
If either XM or Sirius were doing that well, they wouldn't be seeking merger. The numbers these companies quote include new car sales. In other words the free three month subscriptions. Both satellite companies are in serious (not a pun) trouble. I know of more than a few ex sat employees who have jumped ship before they are fired should the merger be approved. Satellite has been on the market for over 7 years and neither ne is anywhere near breaking even. They are bleeding a great deal of money with no sign of it ending anytime soon. That 350,000 units mentioned is up from 45,000 or so sold the year before. It amazes me that that little tidbit was left out of the argument. Hey, I have a satellite radio in my car, but guess what, I didn't buy a satellite radio, I bought a car which came with this device (and which I chose not to renew my subscription to keep said device operating). As to the rest of his artical and opinion may I quote Aerosmith when I say, Dream On.
- Status