[cma-l] cma-l Digest, Vol 77, Issue 38

[fantasy office]

Oh dear oh dear.

I really didn’t want to get into a conflict over this. As a radio bloke 
since 1974, I’m too long in the tooth to lock horns with anybody, 
especially you James. Respect!

But I was there at the start of commercial radio in the UK as well as 
seeing the start of */all/* things digital, and I had high hopes for DAB 
twenty years ago, but with the pathetic marketing, (in particular, the 
TV ads) confusing information and poor coverage and performance in many 
areas, as well as many DAB stations falling by the wayside, it really 
hasn’t really turned out all that well has it?

Thank you for pointing out the figures for me. DAB just over a quarter, 
as confirmed by David. That’s fine. As you say, facts is facts.

I understand the enthusiasm for DAB in some areas, but rural Wiltshire 
just ain’t London. (more Respect!)

In my original post I said I was frustrated by the DAB issue and I’m 
afraid, James, your response has not helped. I’m certainly not anti 
digital, we use a lot of digital technology, for OBs, transmitter links, 
and we’ve been on line for years. I’m not even anti DAB – I just can’t 
see it working for us in Wiltshire. Like I said, London is different.

You said ‘I'll never find you if you're on a tinpot FM transmitter at 
the top of a caravan, because I don't listen to FM. How many more people 
are there like me? Why do you bother broadcasting online?’

This is a bit much really. You clearly know nothing about us or our 
listeners…and why would we NOT go online?

I could have been offended by some of your comments, but I’m bigger than 
that. Perhaps you’d like to visit us and see how we do it here in the 
country?

Phil Dawson

FANTASY RADIO 97FM

Devizes,

Wiltshire



On 9/8/2015 11:40 PM, cma-l-request at mailman.commedia.org.uk wrote:
> Send cma-l mailing list submissions to
> 	cma-l at mailman.commedia.org.uk
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cma-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	cma-l-request at mailman.commedia.org.uk
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	cma-l-owner at mailman.commedia.org.uk
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of cma-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>     1. Re:  The DAB issue (James Cridland)
>     2.  The DAB issue (fantasy office)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2015 21:26:50 +0000
> From: James Cridland <james at cridland.net>
> To: The Community Media Association Discussion List
> 	<cma-l at mailman.commedia.org.uk>
> Subject: Re: [cma-l] The DAB issue
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAGyDWza4rGqhTq0r4N8FUE3jJU4_Aoy0i5avO7tctDKT_qeedw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 4:10 PM fantasy office <office at fantasyradio.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> And when Digital listening figures are quoted, DAB is always included with
>> all other forms of digital listening. No-one ever seems to give us the
>> ACTUAL DAB figures. And I mean LISTENING, not just DAB ownership.
>>
> Yeah, completely agree. How DARE the radio industry hide these figures away
> from us?
>
> http://go.muk.fm/oh-wait-here-they-are
> <http://go.muk.fm/except-actually-they-dont> - for future reference, it's
> on the RAJAR website, under 'listening figures - market trends'. The very
> top, 'all radio listening', chart. It's IRRESPONSIBLE to hide the figures
> away by publishing them as the top chart on the main radio listening
> website and available to anyone.
>
> More evidence that the radio industry is desperately trying to tell anyone
> the ACTUAL DAB figures is the top line in the Digital Radio UK press
> release:
> https://media.info/radio/news/rajar-dab-growth-boosts-digital-listening-to-40 -
> and I mean LISTENING as well as DAB ownership. It's a conspiracy in plain
> sight. How dare they tell us these very figures?
>
>
>> Even digital listening as a whole hasn't yet reached 50% - which means
>> OVER 50% of listening is analogue.
>>
> In the London area, analogue listening is 45.9% - that's UNDER 50% - and
> digital radio listening is 47.3%, which is MORE than analogue radio.
> (There's "don't knows" to bear in mind, by the way). And if community radio
> was in RAJAR, your figures would count, but since you're not, they don't.
>
>
>> And remember - DAB is over twenty years old now!
>>
> And remember - it took 43 years for FM listening to overtake AM listening
> in the US! (So, DAB is growing faster than FM did. A stupid argument, but
> facts is facts).
>
>
>> As far as cost to the broadcaster is concerned, DAB is completely
>> outpriced.
>>
> It's cheaper to broadcast a national radio station on DAB than it is on
> analogue. But it is very expensive for smaller local broadcasters. Good job
> there's work going on to fix that.
>
>
>> Why would we want to spend money on a local multiplex, either as an owner
>>
> Because you can rent out the space to other broadcasters and make money
> from it.
>
>
>> or as a client? when our FM signal is very good.
>>
> Because you want people to listen? Just as many people never bother
> flicking over to AM, households with DAB may never bother flicking over to
> FM, and they'll never find you.
>
>
>> [FM] It's in Stereo and the audio quality is not compromised by reduced
>> bit rates.
>>
> The stereo-ness and audio quality of DAB is up to the broadcaster, it's not
> a technology issue. Mono means a reduction of about 40% of the price of
> stereo; and if you don't think stereo is worth 40% more, that's up to you.
>
>
>> As for any additional PRS or PPL, or even OFCOM costs for DAB
>>
> ...you get a great deal on community radio music licences right now, and
> there's no such thing as a community radio music licence for DAB. If you
> believe you'd be better on a commercial radio music licence, that's
> something for the CMA to take up with the relevant companies. And I believe
> you pay extra for online streaming too?
>
>
>> I've asked the question before... Where does anyone think the money will
>> come from? We can't attract more listeners
>>
> ...why not? I'll never find you if you're on a tinpot FM transmitter at the
> top of a caravan, because I don't listen to FM. How many more people are
> there like me? Why do you bother broadcasting online?
>
>
>> and even if we could, I doubt if our advertisers would be keen to pay
>> additional rates because we're on DAB.
>>
> Why should they pay additional rates for DAB? They pay on results, as any
> advertiser does. If you have twice the amount of audience, you should
> charge twice as much to advertisers.
>
>
>> I think the DAB thing, even with the fine efforts made by the technical
>> people within OFCOM is an unnecessary compication.
>>
> One that is used over four times as much as online streaming, which is
> hardly complication-free.
>
>
>> We also do fine with digital broadcasting - online listening on computer,
>> ipad, smartphone. Stereo, reasonable bit rate, etc.
>>
> Yep, just like DAB, the bitrate and stereo is entirely up to you and your
> budget. Unlike DAB, however, online radio listening costs you more money
> per listener; doesn't have brilliant coverage either; is a fourth of the
> size of DAB listening, and is growing slower than DAB listening.
>
>
>> Sorry this has turned into a rant, but quite clearly, we're in danger of
>> missing the point.
>>
> Sorry this has been a point by point rebuttal, but this type of incessant
> whinging, false accusation and fantasy argument highlights how ridiculous
> this argument is.
>
> Your job is to make great, relevant content for your audience, and place
> that content in a place where the audience want to consume it. That's all.
>
> (And to think that the pro-DAB lobby accuse me of being anti-DAB!)
>
> //j
>
> My weekly 'future of radio' newsletter is less ranty:
> http://james.cridland.net/
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/pipermail/cma-l/attachments/20150909/4f2a84a8/attachment.html>