[BC] Are te sts too expensive?

[Edwin Bukont]

That excuse that the required testing was too expensive,,,I remember 
that being one of the main arguments against tests back in the early 
1980s.  The 'cost' was not in the time of the engineer, as much as it 
was in the loss of billable air time.  In some cases it was indeed as 
well the overtime cost to do the testing outside of prime time, but 
in general, it was the 'waste' of doing tests while loosing revenue 
and having to pay an operator to sit there.

There must be some sort of great intellectual and cultural divide 
among broadcast management and their view of technical necessity.

All too often the same people who will cancel a project or fire staff 
based upon the  right side of the decimal performance in the stock 
market are immune to any arguement as to why test gear and invasive 
maintenance (predictive or preventive) are needed to prove 
operational performance in whole digits.

I have come to think that the problem is not so much the 'cost' of 
the testing, but rather that it would provide a reality check on how 
well the management has spent the dollars in addressing the basics 
needs of what keeps the station reliable and available, on the air 
and listenable.

And yes, I would echo the comments about accountants.  I have far 
more respect for lawyers than I do accountants.  The problem is, in 
part, that many accountants think they are lawyers.  They will 
over-reach and tell you what the law is on various financial 
questions, and then tell you that their CPA gives them the authority 
to direct you.

There is a story from a certain major group station in Texas that I 
use when I have to explain what happens when the accountant runs a 
project in a manner at odds with good engineering practice.

I have had one GM in my career who really understood that accountants 
are a support function, on the same level as the promotions 
department, and not a policy function.  He backed me when I tried to 
show both our local idiot and the corporate guy that they misread the 
tax code on computer depreciation, among other things.  I happened to 
be correct, and eventually that GM sought outside advice that proved 
I was correct.

The sheer arrogance of accountants, and their abuse of power (as my 
ex FIL would say,  'Love me or hate me, I don't care, I am the CPA 
and they will do as I say") is amazing.  The accountants are 2X as 
cocky as the lawyers but often only 25% as competent or useful.   I 
find QuickBooks far more useful as an accounting tool than an 
accountant.   Ever notice how everyone gets blamed for a financial 
mess, EXCEPT the CPA.

I have far too many negative experiences with accountants, especially 
of the MBA variety.  Having taken the same finance classes as MBAs, I 
find it amazing how much they ignore what they were taught, or use it 
as leverage rather than governance.     Look at our current 
economy.  This is not the result so much of old farts working in a 
more liberal system, this is the work of the younger MBA crowd that 
perverted capitalism and then blamed the old farts.

Edwin Bukont CSRE, DRB, CBNT
V- 240.417.2475; F- 240.368.1265