The Deal with HD
I have been considering all that has happened in this circus merger process, and I have been reviewing some of my fellow posters articles, as well as my own. It has occurred to me that one of the things that has been criticized the most, could in fact be the turning point to this merger, and that is HD radio. What do we know about HD radio?
- A slew of Attorney Generals have proposed it as a condition.
- A ton of Congressmen have proposed it as a condition to merger.
- iBiquity has proposed it as a condition to the merger.
- Even Commissioner Addelstein has proposed it as a condition to merger.
So by agreeing to install HD into all future models of SatRads, Sirius/XM could potentially swing a large amount of support towards the side of approval. This would have to be done with some stipulations, of course.
- All FUTURE models would be designed with HD radio. All current models are exempt from this requirement.
- iBiquity or the HD alliance would have to provide the funding to pay for all of the HD chipsets that would be installed into the radios.
- iBiquity or the HD alliance would have to assist with design costs for the inclusion of HD radio.
- iBiquity or the HD alliance would have to share the cost of subsidies for the installation of Satellite/HD radio combos to manufactures. Sirius/XM would still be on their own regarding revshare, etc.
- The agreement does not mandate Sirus/XM or any of their partners to provide any advertising or technical assistance in regards to HD radio, other than that guaranteed by the unit’s warranty.
This proposal would show that Sirius/XM are willing to help support HD radio, as long as they are willing to support themselves. To me, HD is not a deal breaker, as long as Sirius/XM do not have to foot the bill. Is the HD Alliance willing to put some money into the deal or are they simply looking for a free ride?
Feel free to comment here, or head on over to the Sirius Buzz Forums to discuss this further.
Position: Long Sirius, XM.
Tate is still the swing-vote, but she has not mentioned any stipulations, yet. Obviously, Addelstein has been bought and paid for by the NAB. Before caving to junk HD Radio, Satrad should see what Tate proposes.
preposterous
Believe me, you don’t want HD in a Satrad receiver, it just plain sucks, is good ONLY for a boatanchor. It will depreciate the value of any Satrad receiver and would be a useless appendage anyway which just adds to the cost. ibquity seems to have a lot of pull with politicians (Jeez I wonder why?). HD is a goner and they are trying to force their junk, non-working technology into vehicles in any way, shape, or manner they can including piggybacking on Satrad. They do not care whom they hurt in the process of trying to force us Americans to accept a junk technology which has sold less much than a half a million units in the past two years, probably a lot less as ibiquity won’t release their sales figures, (again I wonder why?)
I’m just waiting for the merger to buy a Satrad but if they all include iBlock radio, I will refuse to buy one and will wait for WiMax.
Newman, I have a problem with this, on many scales. On the more grand scale it first, gos against what made this country great in the first place, which was capitalism. Everytime the government gets involved in something it messes it up (S.S., Medicare, ethenal, ect., ect., ect.). One only has to look at anything they got involved in. The free market is the answer to most things take for instance the solar power issue if people wanted it then they would be breaking the doors down at the Home Depo to buy panels. Then solar companies would build them to make the money and would design better ones to stay ahead of the competetion in what would be a profitable market if people were breaking the doors down at the Home Depo.
Second, you cant tell me that this is wrong on so many levels that it just stinks. Where is it written that one company should help its competition. even if HD pays for it to be put into satellite radio, does that still not make it more expensive for the consumer to buy that radio to get something they did not want in the first place. What in gods name is right about that; absolutely nothing.
So in closing, just because the government wants it, does not make it the right thing to do(you and I know that, they want HD for whatever reason, to be giving over 200 million to get it started). Just because they are sick of financing it, does not mean I as a subscriber or a shareholder in SIRI/XMSR should. If I want HD I (the market) will make that decision.
I knew when I wrote this article that I would not be a very popular person. Glad you guys did not dissapoint me! =)
I completely agree that it is not “right” to force satrad to help out HD, I simply said that it might go a long way to get the merger approved.
Secondly, as bobyoung stated in his comment, HD radio sucks (though the sound QUALITY is actually very good, content is king). No body wants them. If nobody is listening to them, what is the harm of installing them? As I said, the HD radio alliance would have to put up all the costs of the chips and design of the radio, so the cost to Sirius and the consumer would be virtually zilch, zero, nada.
If it does not cost me anything, and it does not cost the customer anything, I do not have a problem with a new technology being put into a radio. That doesn’t mean that I (or anyone else for that matter) will have to listen to the crap.
Can’t HD gangsters be straight about anything? Didn’t they sell the myth that hog-gluing digital pigwings onto analog AM&FM signals wouldn’t interfere, when common sense told us it would? Hasn’t the “HD experiment” – another in a long list of misleadings? – proven that HD interference is worse than even skeptics imagined?
Isn’t “HD” a euphemism for an increasingly obvious BigRadio scheme to jam competitors to ruin, make listeners discard billions of radios worth trillions of dollars and buy balky costly HD stooge radios, and deny new licenses to competitors?
If not, how better would you plan it?
Does jamming spectrum while denying so doing yet using jamming to justify denying new licenses sound a bit ironic to you?
What of “CA”, Controlled Access, by which listeners pay for supposedly ‘free digital streams’? Nothing ironic about that, eh?
Are congressmen, Senators, AG’s, and others really all blatting HD’s kazoo? Or is this the old ‘Inevitability Ploy’ well used by the HD cabal and long ago noticed by HD skeptics?
Aren’t the 90s over?
Paul Vincent Zecchino
Manasota Key, Florida
20 July, 2008
That last paragraph in the comment above should read:
“If it does not cost me (as a consumer) anything, and it does not cost the COMPANY anything…..”
Newman, so let me get this straight. You think that Ibiquity, who is already looking like they want satellite radio to pay the 10 to 12 dollars in chip subsidy, also will pay a subsidy, so that it cost no extra to get the consumer who wants satellite radio by itself. I say you need to get real. It will cost us in the end trust me.
Incidentally I’ve heard some HD receivers and their sound (of the one out of three that actually worked) is not that great especially when they have two channels running which is what they keep touting as the next big thing, haha! In fact I couldn’t hear any difference between analog and digital EXCEPT the digital stations sounded shrill while the analog stations sounded natural. HD needs no help at all because of the scope of this government’s involvement, which is complete BS.. (hope PVC is right about this being another one of ibiquity and Alliances B.S. hype story’s)
Also I agree with John, if the public wants these anchors let them beat the door down, so far there hasn’t even been a faint knock. It is not fair at all to let ibiquity who has done nothing but lie, piggyback their junk onto a successful technology that people actually want. The government’s bankrolling HD already, where do you think all those NPR stations got the money for the transmitters? Are we going to have to buy one next year with part of our tax rebate money in order to get it? Who is paying whom, that’s what I’d like to know. HD sucks, it ain’t selling and there is no reason for this to actually still be around this long EXCEPT for the government’s help, they aren’t helping us, that’s for sure.
i’d like 25% of this website set aside for me to get my views across and none of this response stuff i write my own articles. so just use 75% please and give me open access so I can get started. Also I insist you provide a link to my newspaper pubishing company whenever you manufacture your product of words. I think my newspaper is better than your website and i want to give the people the chance to try it. sound good??
I have to disagree with regards to the sound quality. I won’t argue over the content or the commercialization… but the sound quality I will.
I have both a desktop radio at work and a receiver in my car. The quality of the audio is quite good. The HDC codec is next generation hybrid between AAC and PAC, but it also uses SBR, like XM. Sirius’ music channels are compressed to near 42kbps, while XM is down around 32kbps; the HDC codec is at around 48-50kbps. It is similar in quality to the XM codec, just not as compressed. IMHO, of the three — it currently has the best sound. However, if they decide to split the bandwidth again, from 2 channels to 3… it will cause the compression to drop to 32-34kbps. Which would put it on par with XM’s sound… which I don’t care for much any more.
But like content, audio perception is subjective to the opinion of the person listening to it. While there are some that don’t like it, from what I have heard over the years — I disagree. I think it sounds quite good.
Don’t let your distaste for terrestrial radio content and politics, as well as ibiquity and all the other players involved, blind your opinions.
—-
Not only do I believe the proposed Sirius/XM entity should shoulder the cost of installing HD chips into the new receivers, I’m of the opinion the anticipated monopoly should only be permitted to control programming over a minimum number of channels.
I realize both conditions are unlikely to be ordered. In fact, I’d be quite surprised if the gov’t holds out for the 25% public/minority
programming requirement. The alternative here is for the FCC to mandate Sirius/XM permit any 3rd party vendor to build receivers.
I am firmly against the forced inclusion of HD chipsets in ALL, not just an option, Sirius/XM sets. Besides the discussions above about forcing one company to promote its competition which has failed to build its product on its own, which is un-American, the government is nationalizing the satillite radio business by forcing the people to buy products they do not want and which will make the products they do want more expensive and less reliable. The other thing that gets left out is that Sirius and XM have a huge investment in getting the business built to this point which they are expected to give away now for free. And, what about some of that advertising revenue that terrestrial radio will get from piggy backing on satrad’s success?