• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

“a lot of resistance on the part of some of the automakers”

K

KB1OKL

Star Participant
Posted: Friday, September 4, 2015 1:30 am | Updated: 4:40 am, Fri Sep 4, 2015.


Jim Goss of Barrington Research sees “a lot of resistance on the part of some of the automakers” but Strubie seems to see HD radio blowing up like a nuclear bomb. I see it slowly sliding into oblivion.

From Inside Radio:

"Like many a new technology that’s reliant on the budgets and public acceptance, HD Radio has long been criticized for taking too long to reach a tipping point among consumers. More than a decade after launching, it is now found in 35% of new cars—about half that of satellite radio which debuted in late-2001. But the DTS deal may change that.

The slow ramp-up has been a concern for Barrington Research Associates analyst Jim Goss. During Wednesday’s call with analysts to discuss the acquisition of iBiquity Digital by DTS, Goss brought up what he called “a lot of resistance on the part of some of the automakers” and asked if there was any limit on how many cars HD Radio might be put in

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Bob Struble, president and CEO of iBiquity, said he wouldn’t characterize it as resistance but more of building to critical mass. The trend of automakers installing center-stack infotainment systems with screens that display rich visuals plays to one of HD Radio’s strengths, he added. “Those trends are very much in our favor and I think we have overcome a lot of that resistance,” Struble said. “We certainly see no shortage of runway in front of us and that number—pick it—is going to be 85%, 90% or 95% ultimately.”

more at:

http://www.insideradio.com/free/hd-...cle_716206d4-52e0-11e5-90a4-6bababf82abd.html
 
As I've pointed out before, comparing HD and satellite in car isn't fair, since satellite has basically BOUGHT it's position on the dashboard, making them an offer they can't refuse.
 
TheBigA said:
As I've pointed out before, comparing HD and satellite in car isn't fair, since satellite has basically BOUGHT it's position on the dashboard, making them an offer they can't refuse.
Click to expand...

Right, but don't you think it would have been smart of iBiquity to do the same thing? In this day and age, you have to go that extra mile to compete if you're going to be noticed in the dashboard. People seem perfectly happy with their own music players via Bluetooth or AUX-in, or perfectly happy with traditional radio. I'm not saying pay the automakers to put the chips in, but at least compensate them for their troubles. And ditch the licensing fee on the chipsets.
 
tomservo said:
Right, but don't you think it would have been smart of iBiquity to do the same thing?
Click to expand...

Except for some minor income from radio station licensing, iBiquity's entire business model is based on receiving a license fee for each chipset installed in a radio.

There is no revenue to be had from consumers. That is satellite's model.

And ditch the licensing fee on the chipsets.
Click to expand...

Again, without a chipset fee, there is no revenue of any significance to be had.

And there is no other revenue source they can substitute for the chip fee.
 
seedless said:
Looks like two failing business models to me.
There must be a better way.
Click to expand...

Two business models? A company generally has one model, particularly if it has only one product such as iBiquity does.

And failing? iBiquity has at least a 30% profit margin on annual revenues of $40 to $50 million.

Maybe you mean the second business model is that of satellite... one which is immensely profitable.

Let me guess: you weren't a business major.
 
Last edited:
DavidEduardo said:


Two business models? A company generally has one model, particularly if it has only one product such as iBiquity does.

And failing? iBiquity has at least a 30% profit margin on annual revenues of $40 to $50 million.

Maybe you mean the second business model is that of satellite... one which is immensely profitable.

Let me guess: you weren't a business major.
Click to expand...

ibiquity has had a temporary reprieve because if translators, they'll still be gone in 10 years without the mass acceptance they so desperately crave.
 
TheBigA said:
Even if iBiquity had done that, the car makers still have a better deal from satellite.
Click to expand...

Satellite also works about 100 times better and I get to pick from about 200 channels. I've driven all over New England with only a handful of minor dropouts. IIRC it also worked in Canada.
 
KB1OKL said:
ibiquity has had a temporary reprieve because if translators, they'll still be gone in 10 years without the mass acceptance they so desperately crave.
Click to expand...

HD is on stations covering 90% of the population, and that makes it attractive for real-time data such as weather and traffic that can be integrated into GPS systems. That is a sales point for car manufacturers who sell their premium add-ons at enormous mark-ups.

The translators are a major force, with a number of Top 10 markets having significant audiences on HD-based translators.

Add in the very good use of HD-2 by NPR and you have critical mass. Not what was envisioned at the start, and not that stupid "stations between the stations" crap`, but solid and profitable reasons to do HD in major markets. And that is what is propelling HD into the largest cities in Mexico, for example.

If we make the assumption that DTS saw profits and synergies in their acquisition, then we also can assume they will be looking for extensions of the service. They have effectively put their theater sound system patents and technology to work in such places as TiVo boxes, so I'd guess they have additional ideas for iBiquity, too.
 
KB1OKL said:
Satellite also works about 100 times better and I get to pick from about 200 channels. I've driven all over New England with only a handful of minor dropouts. IIRC it also worked in Canada.
Click to expand...

I can't qualify your quote about "100 times better" and I suspect you can't either. I can tell you that I have never had the problems you HD whiners seem to have with dropouts and the signal quality on HD is better than on satt. And yes, I have both satt and HD on the same radio in my car so comparisons are easy.

Oh, and did I mention my HD is free?
 
Last edited:
KB1OKL said:
Satellite also works about 100 times better and I get to pick from about 200 channels. I've driven all over New England with only a handful of minor dropouts. IIRC it also worked in Canada.
Click to expand...

But satellite costs consumers cash money. And it is only really justifiable for large market residents if local OTA media does not have a similar format to what each consumer is seeking.

In smaller markets, satellite may offer more mass appeal formats and compare favorably with local OTA radio, but that's not the bulk of US population.

It's different if you travel for a living, as you obviously do. Most people do not travel enough to justify it. Most people lie nearly all their time under the primary signal of their local stations. And their HD signals.

Within the coverage area of OTA stations I listen to, the HD is more reliable than satellite. But neither has enough coverage defects to be considered annoyingly unsatisfactory.
 
And last estimates I've seen, puts satellite radio (SiriusXM) at around 1.3% total U.S. radio listening. That includes new vehicle owners who have the limited-time free introductory service. Some have claimed SiriusXM inflates their subscription base by including expired free introduction users past the first year, but I've seen no figures to back that up.
 
KB1OKL said:
Satellite also works about 100 times better and I get to pick from about 200 channels.
Click to expand...

This thread is about automakers, remember? Not you. Automakers like that they get paid by satellite. They don't like that HD Radio COSTS them money. That's what this is about.
 
landtuna said:


I can't qualify your quote about "100 times better" and I suspect you can't either. I can tell you that I have never had the problems you HD whiners seem to have with dropouts and the signal quality on HD is better than on satt. And yes, I have both satt and HD on the same radio in my car so comparisons are easy.

Oh, and did I mention my HD is free?
Click to expand...

OK, perhaps 99 times better, and yes FM HD is better sounding than satellite but what about all those dropouts? Regular FM sounds better also and if I had the choices of Satellite radio with analog FM I probably wouldn't have subscribed but as we all know FM has 500 classic rock stations all playing the same krap,..... oh yeah 500 top 40 stations all playing the same but much worse krap. NPR saves FM for me and one certain classic rock station (WZLX Boston) which plays a good variety, otherwise Satellite has a huge variety and will come in from coast to coast with very few dropouts. I used to drive from Worc Ma to Burlington VT for a total of about 220 miles with only a few dropouts, try that in your HD equipped car. I bought a lifetime subscription about 6 or 7 years ago so I'm all set as long as I own this car which I plan on keeping, and if anyone here is trying to say that Satellite drops out as often as HD they have to have a problem with their Satellite receiver or antenna. I know the areas mine drops out around here and they are far and few between.
 
Last edited:
TheBigA said:
This thread is about automakers, remember? Not you. Automakers like that they get paid by satellite. They don't like that HD Radio COSTS them money. That's what this is about.
Click to expand...

Of course and I bet they also get much fewer complaints with Satellite vs HD also because Satellite works as advertised. HD is a scam but you already knew that didn't you?
 
Last edited:
KB1OKL said:
Of course and I bet they also get much fewer complaints with Satellite vs HD also because IT WORKS. HD is a scam but you already knew that didn't you?
Click to expand...


It's all about money, not about the service. If DTS paid the car companies the same amount of money that Sirius pays them, they'd install HD in every car tomorrow, regardless of whether or works or not.
 
TheBigA said:
Automakers like that they get paid by satellite. They don't like that HD Radio COSTS them money.
Click to expand...

That might matter in certain levels of a particular car make but I really doubt it is a major consideration as most cars equipped with HD are in the luxury or near-luxury class and a few bucks there just don't matter.
 
KB1OKL said:
Of course and I bet they also get much fewer complaints with Satellite vs HD also because Satellite works as advertised. HD is a scam but you already knew that didn't you?
Click to expand...

FM HD works fine inside the primary coverage areas of FM stations. That is all that it was intended to do.

Satellite does not work very well anyplace but in a car, which is why the indoor satellite receivers have all but disappeared. I was one of the idiots who bought a satellite arm strap portable to use while cycling; it worked about 10% of the time and only if I did not move. OTOH, tabletop and other in-home HD radios work just fine in the originating station coverage area.
 
DavidEduardo said:


But satellite costs consumers cash money. And it is only really justifiable for large market residents if local OTA media does not have a similar format to what each consumer is seeking.

In smaller markets, satellite may offer more mass appeal formats and compare favorably with local OTA radio, but that's not the bulk of US population.
You're joking right? Satellite has a huge amount of choices, if I lived in NYC perhaps there would be a comparable amount of choices although I doubt it and I couldn't imagine the dropouts with all those tall buildings.
Click to expand...
It's different if you travel for a living, as you obviously do. Most people do not travel enough to justify it. Most people lie nearly all their time under the primary signal of their local stations. And their HD signals.
I don't travel for a living but do drive quite a bit and actually many times I'm listening to CD's.
Me thinks perhaps some people here are trying to gloss over HD's well known reception deficits.
Click to expand...
Within the coverage area of OTA stations I listen to, the HD is more reliable than satellite. But neither has enough coverage defects to be considered annoyingly unsatisfactory.
Click to expand...

Incidentally I'm not a huge satellite booster just that compared to HD there is no comparison, I had to put an FM yagi on my roof with Sony's good tuner to get Boston HD stations here and they all come on with a dipole in analog.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom