[BC] My lobbyist is better than yours

[DANA PUOPOLO]

Even worse..

The industry HAD a separate band and the military bitched, claiming that they
needed the band to test missles!  Note: Not to operate them, but to TEST them!
That band is now useless in much of the country. Why? Because Canada and
Mexico use it for digital radio!!  Seems that those megawatts coming off the
CN tower don't respect the border!

I also find it amazing that the cellular industry was recently able to get the
military to free up HUGE chunks of the very spectrum they whined about giving
broadcast. Could it be that their lobbiests are better then the NAB?

-D




------ Original Message ------
Received: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 03:53:47 PM PST
From: Robert Meuser <Robertm at broadcast.net>
To: "Broadcasters' Mailing List" <broadcast at radiolists.net>
Subject: Re: [BC] Open discussion.....

Williams, Chris (Albuquerque) wrote:

 >
 > Remember the FCC said develop IN BAND technology not Ibiquity. I am
 > surprised that that isn't debated more then how bad IBOC by Ibiquity is.

The FCC said nothing. The industry could have had a separate band but
did not want it. This is now XM and Sirius (talk about shooting one's
self in the foot). They should have filled up the band just to prevent
competition.

We have in band because the industry wanted and developed the early part
of it themselves.

R


 >
 > Imagine a band created where we could set the bitrates to whatever we
 > want and do 5.1 or truly HD radio...........oh wait Im sleep typing
 > again.


See above. Broadcasters gave it away.

R