[BC] Re: HD Receiver

[Robert Meuser]

Xmitters at aol.com wrote:

> My 
>point was that FM became a success, rather than suggesting how long the 
>success took.  I certainly hope that HD becomes successful in less time than it 
>took for FM. It will require a lot of creative thinking to make it all work. HD 
>will have to deliver something that the audience wants, but they cannot find 
>elsewhere. 
>  
>
FM's eventual success was not a result of creative thinking. It was the 
result of certain but very different business decisions. In one case, 
daytime AM stations used FM to extend hours. In this case you can also 
say this is a content issue. There were limited media outlets at the 
time so the local content that could not be  accessed without an FM 
receiver was a compelling reason for some consumers to purchase 
receivers. There was also a social element. In many markets the 
established full time stations had a certain snobbery about them and 
avoided certain programming they considered beneath their community 
standing (like rock or blues and sometimes country). The daytimers often 
happily offered such programming during their extended FM hours of 
operation.

The second business element was more cynical but had essentially the 
same outcome. When the FCC banned simulcasting in larger markets, those 
who held both AM and FM licensees put the cheapest possible programming 
on the air in order to comply. In many cases they handed the channel 
over to the kids of the day. The original progressive rock stations were 
anti capitalistic, anti business and in general a very socialist leaning 
as would obviously be the case given the people on air and the times in 
general. Advertising and ratings were not an issue, keeping the channel 
warm was all the licensees cared about initially. Those who actually 
owned the stations often were large successful businesses who believed 
none of the ideas broadcast on their stations.  Then that 
unpredictability factor crept in. Those undisciplined kids created a 
ground swell that pushed FM forward. Finally the bean counters and 
professionals moved in and found a way to make money. Nobody planned any 
of this. The business originally needed a way to comply with an FCC 
mandate, the 'talent' they hired had a totally different agenda. The 
outcome was radically different than either could have predicted. In the 
end this was also a content issue.

So FM had almost 20 years of non acceptance, followed by about 8 years 
corporate benign neglect where it could develop and then another 6 to 8 
years to rise to dominance. Not exactly a meteoric rise to success.

For HD to mimic FM, the HD2 (and 3) channels must be given over to non 
traditional programmers and executed differently. Very local content 
could also be a factor. But the point is that as Forest Gump once said 
-' it's like a box of chocolates, you never know what you'll get'.

The problem is that in the present market HD less than one tenth the 
time (at best) FM had if it is to compete with new product offerings.

R