[BC] Uselessness of HD

[Rob Landry]

On Tue, 26 Jun 2012, Gary Peterson wrote:

> I've wondered the same thing regarding streaming. When the IP addresses 
> of most of the listeners are obviously in other states or countries, 
> what is the benefit to our local advertisers?

I've always regarded streaming as a prmotional gimmick, not unlike a 
high-powered AM boasting of homw many states it reaches at night. There 
are a few benefits of streaming: listeners can hear you when they're out 
of town, and advertisers based out of town can also hear you.

But streaming will never make a profit, I think.

> "I'm just wondering what's the point?  This is
> clearly an expense, not only in building an HD
> facility, but man-hours in programming, royalty
> fees, and maintenance... why are these channels
> here if they generate no revenue and diminish the
> real station's listenership? Mike Vanhooser"

The thing is, if you originate a second programming channel, whether via 
HD or streaming, and put your brand on it, you have to make it meet the 
same standards you uphold for your main channel, or else it makes you look 
cheap. One local broadcaster has several secondary internet streams, all 
branded with his name, but they're just a bunch of mp3's in playlists. 
You'll never hear news, weather, commentary, commercials, or any of the 
station's special features; the streams are just glorified iPods for which 
the station presumably pays for bandwidth and music licensing. They hardly 
enhance the station'simage, I think, and they do cost money. So... why?

Rob