-
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
The Next AM Fix May Be Giving FM Translators ‘Primary’ Status
- Thread starter Joey1986
- Start date
This article unwittingly demonstrates why this was such a bad idea in the first place. Consider this quote:
"Downs thinks a substantial number of the Class Ds currently licensed would nevertheless be willing to turn-in their license while enjoying a financial windfall by turning off the AM transmitter."
Two words: "Financial windfall." That's how these AM stations see this. They should not have been allowed to get a financial windfall for free. They either run their AMs as licensed, or turn them in. But they shouldn't be allowed to gain a financial windfall. That is not AM revitalization. That is unfair profiteering. This owner talks about how crowded the AM dial is. But these translators, coupled with LPFMs, have done far worse damage to the FM band. You don't revitalize AM by killing FM.
"Downs thinks a substantial number of the Class Ds currently licensed would nevertheless be willing to turn-in their license while enjoying a financial windfall by turning off the AM transmitter."
Two words: "Financial windfall." That's how these AM stations see this. They should not have been allowed to get a financial windfall for free. They either run their AMs as licensed, or turn them in. But they shouldn't be allowed to gain a financial windfall. That is not AM revitalization. That is unfair profiteering. This owner talks about how crowded the AM dial is. But these translators, coupled with LPFMs, have done far worse damage to the FM band. You don't revitalize AM by killing FM.
P
Pat3
Guest
One sad thing about this is that once an AM station gets a translator, they either downgrade the AM signal or simply let it rot. There are several once decent AM stations in my area that I can't pick up anymore because they don't run full power anymore or they have simply let the quality go down hill. Most of these AM stations had superior signals over their FM counterparts. The flea powered translators can only be picked up on a car radio or a very good portable Because of the adjacent channel splatter, especially on a cheap clock radio its just not worth the effort. Some of these stations could only be heard on AM at my house, and now it's nothing but static. And the FM, I have to get away from powerful transmitters because of the splatter and park on a hill.
I think using the "windfall" term is inappropriate. Many of the AMs getting translators are daytimers, and others are severely directional. An FM translator gives them fulltime coverage of a decent are if they have full translator power at a good height. This "saves" otherwise non-viable stations.
I agree with the policy of Mexico (if it were "Russian policy" I'd be in big trouble) where they declared the AM band to no longer be viable and a detriment to the nation's economy as its failure jeopardized capital and jobs. So they established a migration policy to move as many FMs as possible to FM, at which time the AM goes silent. AM channels may be re licensed, but as community stations.
The FCC needs to clean out the AM band by letting translators survive the closure of the underlying AM station, and granting the former translators protection just as A, B and C class FMs have. One broadcaster from KY suggests calling the class "Local Community" FMs, and that parallels the Class IV AM stations that were created back in the 30's to serve just local communities.
Further, the government bears some responsibility as failing to enforce RFI rules has reduced many AM stations' coverage areas by 50% to even 75% as noise overcomes what were once viable signals.
I get all that, but what this article proposes is that owners be allowed to turn in their AM licenses, and just run the translators as primary stations. That is where the "windfall" comes in. These owners knew what they were buying, and they should be required to continue to operate what they bought, or take the consequences of selling. Cleaning out the AM band isn't going to change the physics of the AM band.
It'll certainly help. Less stations on the band means better coverage for those that remain. Maybe even reallocate some of the AM frequencies to add additional Class C channels for community stations.
We're talking about the FCC here. "Community stations?" Communities are having trouble keeping their non-com FMs alive. AMs are more expensive.
Doesn't have to be that way. When I said "Class C channels for community stations," I was talking about using them for both Class C and lower-powered, short-antenna stations, designed to have a limited range. I was thinking of stations that run 50 or 100 watts maximum into a 15-meter base-loaded monopole with a few (16-32) radials -- a glorified ham setup. Something like that wouldn't cost all that much, compared to installing a big 1/4 wavelength tower with a full 120-radial field.
Seems like that concept of LP-AM was brought up and shot down a while ago. I haven't heard any conversation about it from anyone at the FCC.
If translators are given priority over LPFMs, the latter will have nowhere else to go if they are to survive in any form other than online-only.
Which is a good reason why this idea of giving AM translators primary status will go nowhere.
I'm sure you remember the fight that led to the establishment of LPFM, and those folks won't be just rolling over and moving to AM.
"Hello, Prometheus Media?" Remember them?
This is one of those no win situations, and when the government gets them, they tend to do nothing.
But the majority of AM owners in Medium and Small markets have owned them from before the "radio crisis" that occurred "big time" only about 10 or 11 years ago with the advent of the smart phone and the connected tablet. Many have owned them for much of the owner's career... often 50 years or more.
It's not a "windfall" if the government helps an industry transition into a new era thus maintaining diversity of voices and preserving jobs.
I would contend the AM owners didn't know what was ahead of them. When my owner, who passed away a few years back, knew it wasn't FM but the AM dial was viable around 1992. Had he been able to see the decline, I doubt he would have gone the route of AM radio. From a revenue potential, we have seen that drop in half in the past decade, maybe just since 2010.
Actually I saw this coming and pondered how long before the AM stations ask to turn in the AM and keep the FM as a 'primary' station. Even though, I suspect, it would take an act of congress to distinguish which secondary services would get that classification, I'd say the AM and LPFM stations need to fight jointly to see that happen. Do the AM stations get a windfall...I suppose but the windfall is not the translator as much as the ability to sell the land for that 8 tower array or to be released from the maintenance and expense of that AM station, most of whom are daytimers or have poor coverage anyway. For many they would go from a larger portion of market coverage to having to serve a sector of a major market by being that area's local station (aka much like the suburban stations that try to be viable against the full market signals). Regardless, they will have a tough time making it with 250 watts. It's no sweetheart deal. No agency buys for that 250 watt FM, only mom and pop direct buys.
Actually I saw this coming and pondered how long before the AM stations ask to turn in the AM and keep the FM as a 'primary' station. Even though, I suspect, it would take an act of congress to distinguish which secondary services would get that classification, I'd say the AM and LPFM stations need to fight jointly to see that happen. Do the AM stations get a windfall...I suppose but the windfall is not the translator as much as the ability to sell the land for that 8 tower array or to be released from the maintenance and expense of that AM station, most of whom are daytimers or have poor coverage anyway. For many they would go from a larger portion of market coverage to having to serve a sector of a major market by being that area's local station (aka much like the suburban stations that try to be viable against the full market signals). Regardless, they will have a tough time making it with 250 watts. It's no sweetheart deal. No agency buys for that 250 watt FM, only mom and pop direct buys.
Is any of that the role of the FCC? I hear all the time about how government shouldn't support public radio. Isn't this exactly the same thing, except it's not codified into law?
My view is it's a windfall if the owners are given an FM frequency for free, and allowed to shut down and sell the assets of the original property at a profit. And there are no restrictions on how that profit is used.
firepoint525
Walk of Fame Participant
I don't think that I have ever heard the terms "financial windfall" and "AM radio" in the same breath. Sure, AM stations still exist to turn a profit (or try to), but that is about all that most of them can do anymore.
I remember all the fuss that the big FM stations made over LPFMs back in the late '90s, but they have been strangely silent with regard to FM translators. Apparently, it is different for them when it is (potentially) their own sister stations jockeying for positions on the FM dial.
I still consider it odd that I receive different programming on certain FM frequencies than someone in another part of my own town might receive. But I have grown accustomed to that.
And I still remember the heyday of AM radio (granted, it was during my childhood) when we could listen to the same AM stations from over 100 miles away (talking daytime, mind you) clear as a bell, and the only interference that we ever got (on clear days, anyway) was whenever we drove under an interstate overpass!
firepoint525
Walk of Fame Participant
Yeah, a local FM station (translator) was represented in our local July 4th parade last year. Had they been aware that we don't really receive a good signal from them on that frequency, they might have reconsidered having that particular station have a car in our parade, and instead send one of their sister stations which has a better signal here. We are the COL for one of them!
Last edited:
Totally agree. Ultimately the risk is damaging, or killing the FM band in a government-aided attempt to save AM businesses? Edwin Armstrong promoted migration of radio to the FM band back in the 1940's. I mean honestly, it isn't as if AM station licensees haven't had some sort of warning this day would come.
This suggestion is right up there with the US Dept. of Commerce somehow forcing housing of a mom and pop grocery stores inside Wallmarts.
In this case, there is a big difference. "Support" for public radio is funding with taxpayer money. Support for AM stations is purely regulatory, and has almost zero cost for the government.
There is only a profit if the assets... those being almost 100% real estate... can be sold for WMAL or KABC-like prices. In most cases, AMs were built in places that are not anywhere near as valuable and the property sale will finance the translator and make a few dollars but mostly in the case of AMs that were built many decades ago in the earlier years of the industry. But I know of many AMs that sit in depressed neighborhoods or floodplains or rural areas where the land may be nearly worthless.
There is no blanket windfall. Maybe a few stations will make a bit, but most will not come close to making a huge amount.
The guy quoted in the OP seems to think there is. Once again, I don't expect the FCC to do what he wants.
There's one thing that is not a windfall. A FM radio station with primary status has different rules than a translator. Granted the AM side is doing what is required so we're just moving that expense to FM and requiring some equipment outlay. There's more cost and legal requirements for a primary status.
For this to happen, fairly, I suppose, all translators and LPFMs would upgrade to primary service. That would mean any of these huge translator networks with stations all over the country could either upgrade to meet primary status and rules, sell or turn in their license. Any LPFM would (to be fair) be able to jump to 250 watts and/or increase tower height, if possible, and meet primary status requirements. This actually would not change the FM radio dial as the existing stations simply change status from secondary to primary. Very few LPFMs outside more rural locations could increase power/tower height. After all, the three translator windows for AM stations are done. What the FM dial is now is what it would be with primary status. I make this statement having seen auction lists of station locations for a new FM radio service the FCC has released in recent auctions. Most are so far in the sticks, they are just beyond the sticks. In major cities it takes a crowbar to slide in to a spot.
The only upside would be those translator owners who might divest of some of that vast network of translators to transfer them to other entities that would originate programming. These big translator network owners are generally Christian radio non-profits. Some have so many translators it puts them right up there with the big corporate radio companies, if not larger as far as number of stations operated.
To change the classification, I believe Congress would have to okay this and then you'd have what might be years of yelling and screaming from each side. I can imagine NPR affiliates that have statewide networks complaining they don't have the funds to take translators to primary status, that they are in areas that cannot even support the translator anyway. I can see every full power FM saying no way, Jose. I can see LPFM stations saying they've been handicapped by secondary status and mention how many LPFMs had to go away because a full power FM decided to move. The FCC would find themselves in a big ol' can of worms trying to appease as many as possible in hopes their legal department can handle all the challenges from disgruntled broadcasters. There would be action groups like Prometheus and the NAB that would grab the FCC's ear. The NAB would have it rough: bite their AM members and help their FM members or vice versa.
Consider what a 250 watt translator is in many cases. Sure, a few have almost full market coverage in some rated markets but most do not. In larger cities, you might only reach 10% of the population you once did with the AM station. Your game plan has to change. You need to think coverage area. That AM with 75% coverage of a big city like Houston, now only covers Katy, for example. You must be a Katy station now. If there are 3 translators, chances are the 250,000 you reach means 3 stations trying to carve out a local niche amid the long established full power FMs that cover the market and have satisfied Katy listeners all along. In many respects, you're jumping from the fire (the AM) in to the frying pan (the FM translator). The only real positive is you have lower operating expenses and can allocate that 'windfall' from selling real estate to finance your ramp up to be a local station. In that respect, it might be really good for the country. You'll have broadcasters that have to serve previously ignored communities and open yourself to lower spot rates the struggling local business needs to grab the market share to survive and flourish. It will be more economical for ethnic/minority communities served by that translator to lease a station to serve that underserved community.
The unanswered question is with AM listening being as low as it is, will a translator with partial market coverage actually equal or eclipse the potential in listeners that the AM station enjoyed? This, in my book, is where the upside is not so evident. Since listener numbers equate to billing potential, is there any more opportunity there than the operator had with AM alone?
For this to happen, fairly, I suppose, all translators and LPFMs would upgrade to primary service. That would mean any of these huge translator networks with stations all over the country could either upgrade to meet primary status and rules, sell or turn in their license. Any LPFM would (to be fair) be able to jump to 250 watts and/or increase tower height, if possible, and meet primary status requirements. This actually would not change the FM radio dial as the existing stations simply change status from secondary to primary. Very few LPFMs outside more rural locations could increase power/tower height. After all, the three translator windows for AM stations are done. What the FM dial is now is what it would be with primary status. I make this statement having seen auction lists of station locations for a new FM radio service the FCC has released in recent auctions. Most are so far in the sticks, they are just beyond the sticks. In major cities it takes a crowbar to slide in to a spot.
The only upside would be those translator owners who might divest of some of that vast network of translators to transfer them to other entities that would originate programming. These big translator network owners are generally Christian radio non-profits. Some have so many translators it puts them right up there with the big corporate radio companies, if not larger as far as number of stations operated.
To change the classification, I believe Congress would have to okay this and then you'd have what might be years of yelling and screaming from each side. I can imagine NPR affiliates that have statewide networks complaining they don't have the funds to take translators to primary status, that they are in areas that cannot even support the translator anyway. I can see every full power FM saying no way, Jose. I can see LPFM stations saying they've been handicapped by secondary status and mention how many LPFMs had to go away because a full power FM decided to move. The FCC would find themselves in a big ol' can of worms trying to appease as many as possible in hopes their legal department can handle all the challenges from disgruntled broadcasters. There would be action groups like Prometheus and the NAB that would grab the FCC's ear. The NAB would have it rough: bite their AM members and help their FM members or vice versa.
Consider what a 250 watt translator is in many cases. Sure, a few have almost full market coverage in some rated markets but most do not. In larger cities, you might only reach 10% of the population you once did with the AM station. Your game plan has to change. You need to think coverage area. That AM with 75% coverage of a big city like Houston, now only covers Katy, for example. You must be a Katy station now. If there are 3 translators, chances are the 250,000 you reach means 3 stations trying to carve out a local niche amid the long established full power FMs that cover the market and have satisfied Katy listeners all along. In many respects, you're jumping from the fire (the AM) in to the frying pan (the FM translator). The only real positive is you have lower operating expenses and can allocate that 'windfall' from selling real estate to finance your ramp up to be a local station. In that respect, it might be really good for the country. You'll have broadcasters that have to serve previously ignored communities and open yourself to lower spot rates the struggling local business needs to grab the market share to survive and flourish. It will be more economical for ethnic/minority communities served by that translator to lease a station to serve that underserved community.
The unanswered question is with AM listening being as low as it is, will a translator with partial market coverage actually equal or eclipse the potential in listeners that the AM station enjoyed? This, in my book, is where the upside is not so evident. Since listener numbers equate to billing potential, is there any more opportunity there than the operator had with AM alone?
- Status