[EAS] HD developer proposal for EAS

Tue Mar 19 00:38:36 CDT 2019

The Commish's rules aleady require that - REQUIRED- EAS Messages run on all
'Streams' ...Stations around here have their EAS equipment already connect
to their HD Channels...
Therefore, we already have EAS 'Capability' on HD Radio.   Oh yes, you can
probably count on one-hand the radio stations in Seattle that don't run HD.

The return on investment argument is a repeat of what I was hearing back
when I was at KMO and FM stations were going on the air...The GM could not
be convinced in filing for an FM channel - His argument was simple - It has
to make money - DAY ONE- or I'm not interested.       When the 'light'
finally went on for him....he could not afford to buy an FM.      Funny how
times have changed - Now you can't give away an AM !   Look at AM
translators ...I recently read that 50kw Powerhouse KOA in Denver uses their
FM Translator frequency as their main idenfier.

I agree the licensing scheme for HD is flawed and benefits the big guys.    

Back to the original issue - 

EAS and public warning in general if we could convince broadcasters to do
more than the FCC mandated minimum.    WEA is a wonderful tool...It also
shows broadcasters what could be done.  Today Emergency Managers know all
too well that broadcasters cannot be counted on to air their SPW's, CEM's
etc.     The days when broadcasters thought of public service first are, for
the most part, gone.

Back to HD for a moment - When we first rolled out HD here in Seattle there
was, at first, excitement...Then the 'big-fear' set it - and the directive
read - 'Don't do anything with those HD2's and HD3's what would taken
listeners away from the parent FM.
GM's were concerned that they could, potentially, loose 'numbers' and
'market-rank' and hurt themselves.     For us who were excited about the
mode, I was a sad day.    Only now are broadcasters in this area starting to
see HD as something helpful.
Example - Bonneville's got 2-50Kw AM's and 1-FM.     Now they run their AM
programming on HD2 and HD3.   Far better than any low-power Translator.
Entercom just rolled out a nation-wide format called "Q" targeting the LBGTQ
audience.

I do agree that we are on the cusp of seeing a reduction in the number of
stations...Especially AM's.   Co-owned FM's are keeping them afloat.
Fiscally, they can no longer stand on their own.    AM will, in the next few
years resemble AM in the 50's.  Perhaps a good thing as we could end up with
fewer but better AM's.

Time for my beauty sleep- 

Later - Clay

-----Original Message-----
From: EAS [mailto:eas-bounces at radiolists.net] On Behalf Of Richard Rudman

As one of the people who participated in writing the reports that eventually
became what we call IPAWS, I certainly agree that an "all available means"
strategy is prudent. The question is, can the entire radio industry afford
the cost to make HD participate in warning improvement in all markets? In
the last paragraph of this post, I posit a future where that might happen. 

My original point was that the path to greater HD penetration in medium and
small markets is blocked by costs made prohibitive by Licensees not being
able to pay for them, or if they could pay for them, Licensees never able to
get their investment back over a period of time investors look at for a ROI
(return on Investment) analysis. 

The current HD business model appears to make the best sense for large
markets where ad rates, new services income, and hosting several content
streams can create a path to better ROI for the HD investment.

Now for my view of what COULD happen: Maybe down the road if the FCC does an
FM band repack as they have done for TV we can get those benefiting from
availability of a portion of the 88-108 mHz. band to pay for a massive HD
conversion?  That strategy of having other spectrum users pay seems to be
working so far for the TV repack model. 

Finally, and this might sting a bit, some of us believe the radio industry
is long overdue for a "thinning of the herd" path that some might call
"survival of the fittest (formats)". Those who survive would be able to do
so with larger shares of the finite advertising pie.

Richard

>On Mar 18, 2019, at 9:02 PM, Clay Freinwald <k7cr at blarg.net> wrote:

>One of the early foundations of IPAWS was ' By All Available Means'
>(Perhaps many have forgotten this one?)

__________________________________________________________
The EAS Forum Discussion List is hosted by the BWWG (Broadcast Warning
Working Group). The Core members of the BWWG are Adrienne Abbott, Clay
Freinwald, Suzanne Goucher, Barry Mishkind, David Ostmo, Darryl Parker,
Richard Rudman, Gary Timm, and Sharon Tinsley. http://eas.radiolists.net
Please invite your friends to join our Forum! The sign up is at:
https://lists.radiolists.net/mailman/listinfo/eas
___________________________________________________________