[BC] While you are waiting for receivers

[Williams, Chris Albuquerque]

I haven't bought one cd that I liked more then one or two songs. The problem is the record industry, and sometimes even the broadcast industry have forgot it's NOT about the money but about serving the consumer. It should be a wakeup call to radio or record that the average consumer would rather spend money on technology that gives them what they want rather then spend an average of 20.00 on a cd that has maybe 2 out of 10 songs that a person likes. What we need is easy, its always been about content and will always be about content. Not making a bunch of billionaires. In my opinion the IBOC alliance is a good step towards serving the consumer only problem I see is the big broadcasters will need to make a profit to keep shareholders happy. Satellite radio hasnt turned a profit yet. Might never turn a profit so broadcasters have an advantage as long as they don't use the same model that has already turned millions onto XM or Sirius.  
 
(sure seems like I am ranting an awful lot tonight)

________________________________

From: broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net on behalf of Reader
Sent: Sun 12/11/2005 3:57 PM
To: Broadcast Radio Mailing List
Subject: RE: [BC] While you are waiting for receivers



It isn't really the XM and Sirius, any more than it is the way IBOC
is not supposed to be able to be recorded in digital format - it is
the record companies searching for every last dime.

I was amazed to learn that most of the streaming (and maybe for
HD-2?) licenses from RIAA specify no more than three songs from an
artist in three hours ...

Apparently, they are terrified of any station doing what the
companies used to pay for: running an entire album as a "special"

At 02:44 PM 12/11/05, Williams, Chris \(Albuquerque\) wrote
>So what are they going to do if we hook up the headphone out to a
>tape deck or sound card input, sounds like a waste of money fighting
>allowing what has always been allowed. I pay to see or hear from a
>service provider that should be where it stops. We are paying twice,
>once to the service provider to hear it then to the record companies
>to keep it. I CALL B*LLS**T! Then they justify the price of buying
>by offering better audio quality......did they just admit the audio
>quality that both XM and Sirius boast as "Like CD Quality" really
>isn't. Geeesh if I was a consumer protection attorney with Spitzer's
>resources.........
>
>*rant mode off*
>
>________________________________
>
>From: broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net on behalf of Reader
>Sent: Sun 12/11/2005 2:22 PM
>To: broadcast at radiolists.net
>Subject: [BC] While you are waiting for receivers
>
>
>
>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/11/business/yourmoney/11frenz.html?th&emc=th
>
>
>
>
>   - - - -
>You are reading the BROADCAST Mailing List for broadcast professionals:
>
>This mailing list is also available in digest form (messages are
>combined into a "digest" ... which can be helpful if you want to
>reduce the load on your "in-box").
>
>TO SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE:
>Log into: http://lists.radiolists.net/mailman/listinfo/broadcast
>
>**** FOR CHANGES IN SERVICE
>Log into: http://lists.radiolists.net/mailman/listinfo/broadcast
>... go to the very bottom of the page, enter your email address, and
>click on "Edit Options."
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>This is the BROADCAST mailing list
>To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
>For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists:
>http://www.radiolists.net/
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>This is the BROADCAST mailing list
>To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
>For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists:
>http://www.radiolists.net/


_______________________________________________
This is the BROADCAST mailing list
To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists: http://www.radiolists.net/