[BC] Expanded AM Band and License Return

[Paul B. Walker, Jr.]

I think that the licensee's of Expanded Banders and "Reglar band"
stations should be required to give up one license. It would be unfair
to do so otherwise.

The law was written as such so why do they feel they now can try to
avoid or skirt the law?  If we keep changing things, people will be
doing this for years to come.

How is it fair for these people to keep what is now 2 stations but 5
or 6 years ago was only one?

Paul


On 6/19/06, Harold Hallikainen <harold at hallikainen.com> wrote:
> I found the article at
> http://www.radioworld.com/reference-room/special-report/2006.06.21-03_rw_AM_ex_6.shtml
> interesting. I recall the expanded band was introduced to result in a long
> term reduction in interference on the AM band. Stations whose removal from
> the existing band would result in the greatest interference reduction were
> given a preference for licenses in the expanded band. During the
> transition, they were allowed to broadcast on both the old and new
> frequencies. I thought they were required to simulcast, but from what I
> read in this article, that does not seem to be the case. Anyway, these
> stations now do not want to give up the old channels. Not giving up the
> channels appears to result in an increase in local program diversity, but
> does not result in the original goal of interference reduction.
>
> Harold
>
>
> --
> FCC Rules Updated Daily at http://www.hallikainen.com - Advertising
> opportunities available!
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>


-- 
Paul B. Walker, Jr.
www.walkerbroadcasting.com
walkerbroadcasting at gmail.com