[BC] Why an older transmitter may be a good choice

[Bailey, Scott]

Dave, 

   Why bother, he won't be at that station very long. Paul seems to
drift from station to station, (mostly across the eastern part of the
U.S.) landing at these neglected AM's, virtually living in and taking up
residence of them until the owner decides it's time for him to go, or
the station is sold or in trouble. I give this a few more months, and he
will be somewhere else. After the disrespectful comments he made to
Robert Meuser, (who has been in this business for many years with lots
of knowledge) I wouldn't waste my time. 
   I may not sometimes agree with Robert, but I do respect his opinions.
If Paul had major interest in this station, he would be out selling ads,
or selling blocks of airtime, since he is the only one that works and
lives there.

-----Original Message-----
From: broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net
[mailto:broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net] On Behalf Of RadEng
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 11:27 AM
To: Broadcasters' Mailing List
Subject: Re: [BC] Why an older transmitter may be a good choice

Paul has already mentioned that his TX is an RCA BTA1M, why doen't
someone
with access to an RCA BTA1M manual run the numbers and show him the
difference in electricity costs between his current rig and a new SS
rig?
He's not an engineer, why not run the numbers, show him how you did it
(teach), and thus truly equip him to convince the powers that be that
real
money could be saved here?  Or maybe it's more fun to just lecture him
in
general terms and keep the specifics of this knowledge to ourselves?
"Do it
because I say it's better" is perhaps not the best approach if we truly
want
to help, especially with numbers this easy to crunch.

Dave Morais