[BC] NAB ??? The Cyber way

[Xmitters at aol.com]

In a message dated 3/11/09 7:49:55 PM Central Standard Time, 
broadcast-request at radiolists.net writes:

> I dislike Vegas in much the same way, and probably for the same reasons,
>   just not rabidly. I'm there for business reasons, and to renew 
friendships 
> with
>   folks I'll not see anywhere else, but were it to move and be as "big" I'd 
> move
>   with it.
>   Were it to simply not happen, I'd be at the next biggest broadcast event, 
> for
>   the same reasons I go to the spring show.
>   ( that might be better, as anyone I'd want to see would probably do the 
> same,
>   and we wouldn't have the spam problem that is NAB )
>  
>   But, for a vacation, Vegas is not even in my top 200 choices.
>  
>  -- 
>  Cowboy

List,

Cowboy's reasons for going to NAB are very similar for mine. If we could 
truly find a way to exhibit over the web, our PD's and GM's could gather round 
a 
cyber presentation and see all the same things. There are some things that 
could not be marketed over a Cyber cast. But at some point, I would like to see
 
some marketing and NAB people give this some honest consideration. It would sav
e 
time and a lot of money.

The face time and greeting is very important, which makes NAB a huge draw. So 
let's have a NAB that is more conference (people) oriented, and 
professionally social. The same product cyber presentations could also be avail
able at the 
conference, where truly interested people in specific products, could ask the 
vendor more pointed questions. 

If there is a way to do this practically, it's not something that will happen 
overnight. It will take a lot of ingenious creativity, determination, and R&D 
funding.

I just find it hard to believe that there is nothing, absolutely NOTHING that 
computer/internt technology could not do to make the show more efficient. I 
doubt we will see the day when ALL exhibition is gone. But if we could make the
 
show take up less room and maybe also have MORE content at the same time, it 
would be more effective and could be hosted by more cities. 

NAB conventions have been going on with the same basic format for many 
decades, and not much has change in the way it is presented. We here on this li
st 
are supposed to be the creative thinkers, problem solvers, and innovators. 
Right?  With that said, I don't see how we can reject the idea without at least
 a 
look at this approach. 

Maybe I have way too much confidence in the membership here than what is 
actually deserved. Ergo, my expectations may be unreasonable to expect some 
consideration without generating threads upon threads of smart assed  responses
 on 
the Cyber NAB topic. 

Continue to have fun here if you want; I believe we should. I'm the most 
guilty one here when it comes to trying to be funny with posts.  I just can't l
et 
a potential rotflmao comment go by  without adding to it. But I need to pull 
back on that temptation. 

It does not matter to me personally if this Cyber NAB idea is examined or 
not, or if it is examined and found to be impractical. It also does not matter 
to 
me personally if the idea continues to be barraged with useless comments. If 
it does, it will be worth it. Because at that point, I will know truly who I'm 
dealing with here. 

So let's put on  our creativity hats and see what we can come up with. The 
only way I can see a new transmitter for example, is to go to the show, go to 
the factory, or go to a station that has one. It's a false dilemma to me.  Gott
a 
be more ways than that. 

Jeff Glass, BSEE CSRE
Chief Engineer
WNIU WNIJ
Northern Illinois University

ault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID%3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)