Re: [IRCA] The DX Crystal Ball

["Craig Healy" <bubba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> The growth of satellite technology and alternative media (I-Pods) will
mean
> that traditional radio will continue to lose market share. Meanwhile, new
technology like
> Wi-Max will begin to put IP based radio receivers into "early adopter"
status, at
> least in the major metro markets.

Streaming is really where the growth market is.  There was a paragraph in
one of the broadcast news bulletins that said places like Clear Channel are
experienceing huge growth in streaming.  Far more than HD Radio, it seems.

> (AM) Many will find the market just too fragmented to make money at all,
and will go dark.

I think your comment on niche marketing may happen.  It is now, but I think
the cheaper cost of streams will take some of that migration.  With a
stream, you don't have to jump through the draconian hoops the FCC has
created.  And, by using an offshore server, you can escape a lot of other
red tape and costs.

> From a DXing standpoint, the challenges will be many. While I think that
> IBOC on AM will go the way of AM-Stereo, failing to find a market niche.
Text based
> traffic reports may catch on in some metro markets, overall the technology
will fail to find an
> audience on AM.

The time is coming when they will have to either allow night IBOC or admit
it can't work.  And, there are a lot of stations with directional arrays
that will never be made to have a wide enough bandwidth.  So, there will be
a good percentage of stations that simply won't ever run it.

> But in the short term, we'll have to put up with a lot more of it. Given
the
> FCC's catering to business concerns, I expect we'll soon see IBOC at night
as well.

If so, it will be short-lived.  I am still waiting for the first lawsuit to
be filed against IBOC adjacent channel interference.  It *will* happen.

> But offsetting this problem will be that as more stations go dark, there
> will be less inference on graveyard and regional channels. Unusual
programming will also make it
> easier to identify stations that are received. As the syndicated talk
programming moves to FM,
> the AM band will take on a lot more of the local character that it had in
the past.

Personally, I don't think many will go dark, but that's just a gut feeling.

> THE NEXT TWENTY YEARS
> =======================================

Rather than do a point-by-point discussion, I'll simply mention that
inventions yet to happen can wreck projections beyond a few years.  The
internet is a *huge* example of that.  Who could have predicted that 20
years ago?  And before that, who would have seen the sudden leap of
popularity of FM.  And TV taking over from radio within a decade.  And even
radio superceding sheet music and home pianos.

I do think AM broadcasting will survive, if only in a boutique fashion.
Horses were the prime means of transportation in the 1800's to maybe a
hundred years ago.  Now they are a hobby, and a well-financed one at that.
I think broadcasting will become a hobby.

One thing I don't see happening is the spectrum being used for anything
else.  The whole range from DC to perhaps 2MHz is a minor sliver of what is
available in UHF and beyond.  The skittish propagation and large antenna
size is also a detraction.  I can see the ARRL filing to allow ham access to
the whole band, and maybe for amateur broadcasting.  We will see what they
do with the rapidly vacated LW range.  That will be a clue.

For right now, my money is on streaming technology.  Already streams have
far better clarity than even the state of the art HD Radio.  And no limit on
channels such as HD1 or HD2.  HD Radio is already obsolete.  Cost, as well.
I run a stream now of 24/7/365 music for a project and it costs me only the
DSL.  Under a hundred bucks a month, and that DSL and computer do far more
than just the stream.

Try running *any* radio station for a hundred bucks a month, total.  Even an
LPFM is much more than that with fees and license costs.

Craig Healy
Providence, RI

_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca

Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers

For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org

To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx