The Ten Myths of DAB

[amateur51]

MAnd another reason why analogue radio should go was my earlier, 'supercillious' point about the projected high revenue costs of maintaining the network, cited by PWC.

Ah I understand now - it's a case of high revenue costs v high capital costs, the latter to be borne by the listeners who have no option under these propsals but to buy several pieces of new kits. In your dreams, AIC - well not without a fight

[An_Inspector_Calls]

Ah I understand now - it's a case of high revenue costs v high capital costs, the latter to be borne by the listeners who have no option under these propsals but to buy several pieces of new kits. In your dreams, AIC - well not without a fight

Clearly you don't understand, because you actually have to see the revenue and capital costs of both systems to get a full financial picture. Both costs will be borne by the listeners - where else is the money coming from? As for the costs of domestic replacement being a show-stopper, I seem to remember that being a claim of the analogue TV switch-off, but it didn't seem to matter in the end - people had either switched previously, or just went out and bought a £20 Freeview receiver.

[vinteuil]

As for the costs of domestic replacement being a show-stopper, I seem to remember that being a claim of the analogue TV switch-off, but it didn't seem to matter in the end - people had either switched previously, or just went out and bought a £20 Freeview receiver.

A difference being that most of the people I know have only one tele - but have and use some half-dozen radios in various rooms.

[amateur51]

Clearly you don't understand, because you actually have to see the revenue and capital costs of both systems to get a full financial picture. Both costs will be borne by the listeners - where else is the money coming from? As for the costs of domestic replacement being a show-stopper, I seem to remember that being a claim of the analogue TV switch-off, but it didn't seem to matter in the end - people had either switched previously, or just went out and bought a £20 Freeview receiver.

Thanks for clearing that up, AIC - so have I got it right? No DAB - no additional capital outlay for listener + no additional revenue cost for listener?

Maybe I understand better than you think - case closed

[amateur51]

A difference being that most of the people I know have only one tele - but have and use some half-dozen radios in various rooms.

[An_Inspector_Calls]

No, still not there, because under your scenario (covered by PWC - the do nothing option, you see) there'd be the higher revenue costs associated with the maintenance of the FM system. Case closed.

[An_Inspector_Calls]

A difference being that most of the people I know have only one tele - but have and use some half-dozen radios in various rooms.

Yeah, and everyone I know only has one TV . . .

[amateur51]

No, still not there, because under your scenario (covered by PWC - the do nothing option, you see) there'd be the higher revenue costs associated with the maintenance of the FM system. Case closed.

Not so fast, clever clogs - how can I possibly see? You have the PWC report, I don't. Detailed comparison svp

[Resurrection Man]

.....
The simplest justification for switching off FM is that the RF spectrum is a limited resource and we're transmitting most of the BBC radio channels on MW, FM, DAB, DTT, and satellite. That's profligate and more than adequate. Then throw in internet and 3G/4G. I would, however, resist LW going because I regard the LW transmission of R4 as a national security asset which we should not relinquish. You might counter by saying no one has come forth and made any proposals for the FM band, but why should industry do that for what might be a chimera?

That's not a justification but wishful thinking.

But I'd bet folding money that the adjacent aviation bands might well be extended (they're hugely congested at the moment) as would 4G-displaced frequency hoppers from the 866 MHz band.

That suggestion was also made elsewhere and I posed it on one of the professional aircraft/operational forums and the consensus was that it was either a non-starter or not needed.

And another reason why analogue radio should go was my earlier, 'supercillious' point about the projected high revenue costs of maintaining the network, cited by PWC.

That report was redacted and so where do your 'high revenue costs' come from`?

[Resurrection Man]

Yeah, and everyone I know only has one TV . . .

There was a perceived benefit by the public in digital TV in that (a) better and more reliable video recorders (b) for some, more choice of channels (c) for some, better picture quality eg HD. Often the conversion cost was amalgamated into the cost of getting the PVR.

None of those are relevant to radio.

Vinteuil's point is very relevant. Ofcom estimate an established user base of over 100 million FM radios.

[Paul Sherratt]

Smack Dab In The Middle.

[Resurrection Man]

.... Both costs will be borne by the listeners - where else is the money coming from? ......

How do you work that out? My understanding is that all transmission is outsourced now to Arqiva. So they will have a contract with both the BBC and commercial operators to provide this service. Quite possible that there is an element of passing down an element of capital cost to both parties. Who knows. Could just be rolled up in the annual costs. Doesn't matter. The costs that the BBC bears comes out of the licence fee and it is true to say that it is the licence payer who pays. But to be pedantic anyone with a radio and no TV does not pay a penny.

As far as commercial goes, I don't pay anything to Planet Rock to listen to them...so how does 'borne by the listener' work?

[Resurrection Man]

Smack Dab In The Middle.

Or as they say the 'r' is silent in DrAB

[teamsaint]

There was a perceived benefit by the public in digital TV in that (a) better and more reliable video recorders (b) for some, more choice of channels (c) for some, better picture quality eg HD. Often the conversion cost was amalgamated into the cost of getting the PVR.

None of those are relevant to radio.

Vinteuil's point is very relevant. Ofcom estimate an established user base of over 100 million FM radios.

DRM is still what worries me. Once all transmission is digital, everything will be a potential revenue stream.

[Don Petter]

Do you mean an aerial on the roof, or wall? Unfortunately neither are really feasible.

See my #51.

It was a joke, which obviously went over most people's heads.