[BC] Should terrestrial broadcasters embrace satellitebroadcasters?

[Chuck Lakaytis]

I have been in this business now for almost thirty years.  I came into it 
almost by accident and the first thing that amazed me was the FCC 
requirement to have "engineers" at each station.  I knew many competent 
people that had the license on the wall.  And I knew a huge number that had 
that piece of paper and were lazy and dumb as a post.  They enjoyed the 
government ordained sinicure.  I dont miss those days at all.

I put one of the first Orban 8000's into service and was astounded at the 
audio quality and stereo sound field.  At that particular station the 
technical improvement vastly increased listenership.

So it is about CONTENT and TECHNICAL EXCELLANCE


Chuck Lakaytis
Director of Engineering
Alaska Public Broadcasting, Inc.
135 Cordova Street
Anchorage, AK 99501
907 277 6300
907 277 6359 FAX
907 301 4339 Cell
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Glen Kippel" <glen.kippel at gmail.com>
To: "Broadcasters' Mailing List" <broadcast at radiolists.net>
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 2:48 PM
Subject: Re: [BC] Should terrestrial broadcasters embrace 
satellitebroadcasters?


> As an article I read about 15 years ago said, we will have to decide 
> whether
> we are in the content business or the transmission business.  We will 
> always
> need content providers, but will the MW-AM and VHF-FM bands be in 
> existence
> in the future?
>
> On 3/30/07, Mike Erickson <wirelessmedia at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I don't think it's even an issue.  Satellite radio, like HD, is a band 
>> aid
>> until the next most convenient method of content delivery, which will
>> probably be the portable media device which does phone, radio, internet
>> etc
>> all bundled into one package at $XX per month.  It plugs into your
>> dashboard, it plugs into your home stereo, it's portable.  We practically
>> have it already.  Imagine how refined it will be 5 years from now?
>>
>> Traditional analog AM and FM transmission, HD and satcasting will be
>> "quaint".
>>
>> Radio should worry about radio and delivering its content over as many
>> avenues as it possibly can OUTSIDE the current limitations of 88-108.  If
>> radio does not think outside the box it will fail.  It needs to change
>> content delivery and improve its business plan and that DOES NOT include 
>> a
>> future with HD or satellite radio, both are technologies that are already
>> past their time.  It's up to radio, for once, to chart new territory on
>> the
>> web, pay the licensing, do it, be ahead for once or lag behind with HD
>> thinking that people are going to go thru all this trouble for it.
>>
>> The horse is out of the barn.  Embrace the thunderstorm.
>>
>> =Mike=
>>
>> On 3/30/07, Barry Mishkind <barry at oldradio.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Let me toss this question at you.
>> >
>> > And, before you comment, consider this: many, many times when a trade
>> > organization - and its puppets - squeal the loudest against something
>> > (the potential satellite merger), it often indicates that the
>> > "something" is a good idea.
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> >
>> > The BROADCAST [BC] list is sponsored by SystemsStore On-Line Sales
>> > Cable-Connectors-Blocks-Racks-Wire Management-Test Gear-Tools and More!
>> > www.SystemsStore.com       Tel: 407-656-3719    Sales at SystemsStore.com
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> =Mike Erickson=
>> W1WHN
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> The BROADCAST [BC] list is sponsored by SystemsStore On-Line Sales
>> Cable-Connectors-Blocks-Racks-Wire Management-Test Gear-Tools and More!
>> www.SystemsStore.com       Tel: 407-656-3719    Sales at SystemsStore.com
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
>
> The BROADCAST [BC] list is sponsored by SystemsStore On-Line Sales
> Cable-Connectors-Blocks-Racks-Wire Management-Test Gear-Tools and More! 
> www.SystemsStore.com       Tel: 407-656-3719    Sales at SystemsStore.com
>
>
>