KXXO takes on big, BAD Hubbard Radio! - Page 3
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 61

Thread: KXXO takes on big, BAD Hubbard Radio!

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBigA View Post
    The FCC doesn't make their decisions by popular vote. It doesn't matter how many people sign the petition. If the rules say the translator can be licensed, it will. This isn't like a reality TV show where people can vote someone on or off the island.
    That's true. The rules regarding interference by secondary services (LP, TX, etc) still contain the words "ANY interference". This allows the primary station some very wide leeway, when defining the perceived harm a secondary might be doing to his station.

    I've seen successful challenges to translators, based on as few as 2 or 3 complaints. A couple resulted in the translators being shut down, while others resulted in negotiated changes that eventually satisfied the primary operator.

    If they're committed, I wouldn't discount KXXO's ability to pull this off just yet. The translator might get built, based on contours, but the real test will come when they turn it on.

  2. #22
    Moderator/Co-Administrator
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    37,264
    Quote Originally Posted by Grounded Grid View Post
    That's true. The rules regarding interference by secondary services (LP, TX, etc) still contain the words "ANY interference". This allows the primary station some very wide leeway, when defining the perceived harm a secondary might be doing to his station.

    I've seen successful challenges to translators, based on as few as 2 or 3 complaints. A couple resulted in the translators being shut down, while others resulted in negotiated changes that eventually satisfied the primary operator.

    If they're committed, I wouldn't discount KXXO's ability to pull this off just yet. The translator might get built, based on contours, but the real test will come when they turn it on.
    The FCC is, right now, working on new rule-making to avoid those small-number-of-listener complaints whereby the verification process would be more rigid and the number of complaints would have to be more significant.

    The obvious motivation is to prevent from prospering those cases like the Hazard, KY, FM that got a couple of listeners in its 45 dbu signal area to write letters, shutting down a translator in Lexington, KY... over 100 miles away!
    www.americanradiohistory.com
    Broadcasting Magazine and Yearbooks, Billboard, Cash Box, R&R, Record World, Music & Media, Audio, Television/Radio Age, R&R, Duncan's American Radio, Popular Electronics, Studio Sound, Broadcast Engineering, db, and more.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Aberdeen, WA and Allyn, WA
    Posts
    1,374
    I'm torn on this one. Some time ago, KXXO made serious attempts to block the move of my 97.7 from Raymond to Oakville. Their attorneys called Oakville a wide spot, a berg, a location, everything but a community of license, even though Oakville had a school system, City Hall, police force, a Mayor. In the end, they lost, and 97.7 was able to move. Now the area has a few more FMs to contend with, and a couple more coming up.
    On the other hand, the current regulations don't confine interference by FM translators to any signal contour. Unless and until the regs are changed, KXXO is allowed to solicit complaints from their regular listeners, no matter where they are located. And I have a first adjacent that messes up my KSWW signal from Kamilche through the Shelton area.

    Go David!
    KSWW (AC) "Sunny" 102.1-101.1 -- KJET (Hot AC) "The Jet" 105.7-93.1 -- KANY (Hot Country) "Bigfoot" 107.3 -- KBKW (NewsTalk) "The Talk of Grays Harbor" 1450-100.5 -- KSWW HD-2 (Classic Rock) "The Quake" 103.9 -- KSWW HD-3 "Timber Country" 94.7<br />Keeping radio locally-owned on the Washington Coast.<br />Still using a microphone - 6:10-7:00 am - www.kbkw.com

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidEduardo View Post


    The FCC is, right now, working on new rule-making to avoid those small-number-of-listener complaints whereby the verification process would be more rigid and the number of complaints would have to be more significant.
    That would actually be a good thing. I've been involved with having to investigate complaints between stations and translators taken seriously by the Commission. In all but one instance, the complaint was either made by a friend or relative of someone who worked at the station with no way of showing how their listening was being impacted, or in a couple cases, were problems with their receiver or antenna.
    The one legitimate example of working on the translator side of a complaint; I installed a bandpass filter to the output of a translator, followed with a documented spectrum sweep, satisfying the FCC and complainant.

    If the Commission is going to open the translator flood gates with AM stations, then they'd better be prepared for a flood of nonsense interference complaints.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidEduardo View Post


    The FCC is, right now, working on new rule-making to avoid those small-number-of-listener complaints whereby the verification process would be more rigid and the number of complaints would have to be more significant.

    The obvious motivation is to prevent from prospering those cases like the Hazard, KY, FM that got a couple of listeners in its 45 dbu signal area to write letters, shutting down a translator in Lexington, KY... over 100 miles away!
    What about the interference solicitations on one stationís website made by one translator owner against another? KIKO (AM) on the outskirts of the Phoenix Metro is trying to shut down another translator on 102.9 by trying to grab interference complaints through their website, even though the format on the station is brand new and the other translator is rebroadcasting an established station.
    The views expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by EricStein View Post
    What about the interference solicitations on one station’s website made by one translator owner against another?
    The way it is today, technically translators are not a protected class, let alone by another translator. Same goes with LPFM's.
    Supporters of one translator or another can whine all they want. As long as the translators were constructed within the original authorization(s), they don't have much of a leg to stand on.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Kelly A View Post
    The way it is today, technically translators are not a protected class, let alone by another translator. Same goes with LPFM's.
    Supporters of one translator or another can whine all they want. As long as the translators were constructed within the original authorization(s), they don't have much of a leg to stand on.
    ... and the FCC couldn't care less about format, first or not, so there's no argument there, either.

    A company I worked once "motivated" another broadcaster to change their antenna on a co-channel translator, once it became clear the new signal was well within our 60. They claimed they were merely "filling the holes" in our signal, even though they were poking through it within a few blocks of our antenna.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Edmonds, Washington
    Posts
    2,361
    Quote Originally Posted by bossbill View Post
    I'm torn on this one. Some time ago, KXXO made serious attempts to block the move of my 97.7 from Raymond to Oakville. Their attorneys called Oakville a wide spot, a berg, a location, everything but a community of license, even though Oakville had a school system, City Hall, police force, a Mayor. In the end, they lost, and 97.7 was able to move. Now the area has a few more FMs to contend with, and a couple more coming up.
    On the other hand, the current regulations don't confine interference by FM translators to any signal contour. Unless and until the regs are changed, KXXO is allowed to solicit complaints from their regular listeners, no matter where they are located. And I have a first adjacent that messes up my KSWW signal from Kamilche through the Shelton area.

    Go David!
    I am wondering if you've gotten complaints from KBKS listeners in Pacific County because of your 106.1? I used to be able to get KBKS at my grandpa's, but even if I had the time to file a complaint, I'm only one person who doesn't live in that area, and only down there a handful of times a year. When does KJET move to the new site? Once that happens and the 93.1 translator is shut down, I'd suggest either moving it to the Raymond site or moving the 106.1 translator to 93.1 to resolve that issue.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Bellingham WA
    Posts
    6,022
    Quote Originally Posted by boombox4 View Post
    I think what Bongwater says holds some merit. I have heard of people commuting to Everett from South King County (probably a 35 mile commute), and even have heard of some who commute to Seattle from places like Graham to the south, Stanwood to the north, or even as far south as Olympia.

    They may be rare, but long commutes are more common than they were even in the 1990's when people complained about Seattle traffic.

    I would guess they listen to the big signals, or maybe switch from a station to another if there are reception issues. But that's just a guess.
    That's my point. And if the only way to get a steady signal is by streaming it, they will sooner do that than change stations to something they're not interested in and use their car's WiFi capability for what they're paying $28,000 and their unlimited monthly smartphone data plan for.

    This is not 1998. The idea of a captive local radio dial has really all but vanished. Especially along the major highway corridors in urban areas and suburbs where the mobile data is at. Which makes the very idea of all these translators everywhere in those areas themselves seem strange in my eyes.

    And seriously, from a resource and practical viewpoint, wouldn't AM allergic KKNW listeners be better served by a reliable mobile stream that goes everywhere they already have than an iffy future translator that doesn't even cover all of Bellevue decently? Especially for the internet radio spook type format already on KKNW?
    Pro-Wrestling: A sport where people without pants fight for a belt.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Aberdeen, WA and Allyn, WA
    Posts
    1,374
    Actually, you're the only one. And the various Arbitron County Reports have not shown any listeners in Pacific County anyway.
    KSWW (AC) "Sunny" 102.1-101.1 -- KJET (Hot AC) "The Jet" 105.7-93.1 -- KANY (Hot Country) "Bigfoot" 107.3 -- KBKW (NewsTalk) "The Talk of Grays Harbor" 1450-100.5 -- KSWW HD-2 (Classic Rock) "The Quake" 103.9 -- KSWW HD-3 "Timber Country" 94.7<br />Keeping radio locally-owned on the Washington Coast.<br />Still using a microphone - 6:10-7:00 am - www.kbkw.com

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




     
Our Conferences
Useful Contacts
Community


Contact Us