The Ten Myths of DAB

[An_Inspector_Calls]

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

Well if you're so ill-informed, why comment?

[amateur51]

Well if you're so ill-informed, why comment?

As I've made very clwar from my involvement in this thread, I don't want DAB to replace FM etc for the reasons I've given.

You've then come in with some argument apparently backed-up by figures that I, and RM who is infinitely better informed on this than I, do not possess.

So I was merely asking you to use the figures that you possess to do a comparison of costs ... that's all.

If you can't/won't respond, fair enough but don't call me ill-informed, because I've turned to you for information

[Flosshilde]

See my #51.

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

Very helpful. Thanks. (not)

[An_Inspector_Calls]

That's not a justification but wishful thinking.

Not at all, it's perfectly logical.

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.

Well, I also hold a PPL so let me fill you in on the aviation VHF band. It stretches from 108 to 135 MHz; 108 to 118 MHz is occupied by navigational signals such as VOR and ILS. 118 to 135 MHz is occupied by over 1,500 comms channels and is packed out. That's because it's obviously difficult separating traffic when it's broadcasting from 30,000 feet and because we've not only got aerodrome communications, but company communications as well. Congestion is a problem.

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

Go to myth 7, or become better acquainted with your sources. (Same applies to teamsaint. The PWC report is perfectly easy to get hold of).

As for the costs going here and there, ultimately we, the taxpayer/licence payer pay. No one else. There might be some petty wrinkles in the distribution of the costs, but broadly, that's it.

[Resurrection Man]

Not at all, it's perfectly logical.


Well, I also hold a PPL so let me fill you in on the aviation VHF band. It stretches from 108 to 135 MHz; 108 to 118 MHz is occupied by navigational signals such as VOR and ILS. 118 to 135 MHz is occupied by over 1,500 comms channels and is packed out. That's because it's obviously difficult separating traffic when it's broadcasting from 30,000 feet and because we've not only got aerodrome communications, but company communications as well. Congestion is a problem.



Go to myth 7, or become better acquainted with your sources. (Same applies to teamsaint. The PWC report is perfectly easy to get hold of).

As for the costs going here and there, ultimately we, the taxpayer/licence payer pay. No one else. There might be some petty wrinkles in the distribution of the costs, but broadly, that's it.

The PwC is REDACTED. If you have a link to an unredacted version then please let us have it. Otherwise your post is empty unfounded rhetoric.

Regarding who pays for it, you seem to have a very strange view on economics. 'Petty wrinkles' indeed. You know we've got you bang to rights for making claims but not being able to justify them. For example, what costs does a person who does not have a TV licence incur when listening to Radio 3 on their transistor radio?

[An_Inspector_Calls]

The PwC is REDACTED. If you have a link to an unredacted version then please let us have it. Otherwise your post is empty unfounded rhetoric.

Regarding who pays for it, you seem to have a very strange view on economics. 'Petty wrinkles' indeed. You know we've got you bang to rights for making claims but not being able to justify them. For example, what costs does a person who does not have a TV licence incur when listening to Radio 3 on their transistor radio?

Go search for it yourself, otherwise your case is empty rhetoric. I've quoted from it, you haven't.

As for your second point, do come on, the number of people not paying through licence fees/taxation of some form or other is an insignificant minority

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

As for your second point, do come on, the number of people not paying through licence fees/taxation of some form or other is an insignificant minority

And the number of people who have thought it worthwhile to go out and buy a DAB radio seems to be an insignificant minority too.

[teamsaint]

Not at all, it's perfectly logical.


Well, I also hold a PPL so let me fill you in on the aviation VHF band. It stretches from 108 to 135 MHz; 108 to 118 MHz is occupied by navigational signals such as VOR and ILS. 118 to 135 MHz is occupied by over 1,500 comms channels and is packed out. That's because it's obviously difficult separating traffic when it's broadcasting from 30,000 feet and because we've not only got aerodrome communications, but company communications as well. Congestion is a problem.



Go to myth 7, or become better acquainted with your sources. (Same applies to teamsaint. The PWC report is perfectly easy to get hold of).

As for the costs going here and there, ultimately we, the taxpayer/licence payer pay. No one else. There might be some petty wrinkles in the distribution of the costs, but broadly, that's it.

Are you suggesting that the BBC's intense activity in the DRM field is NOT connected to income streams, and the move to all digital platforms?

[Resurrection Man]

Go search for it yourself, otherwise your case is empty rhetoric. I've quoted from it, you haven't.

As for your second point, do come on, the number of people not paying through licence fees/taxation of some form or other is an insignificant minority

LOL...what a cracker...I asked you where the evidence was in the PwC report to support your sweeping statement. You can't find it.

OK...tell me how does anyone listening to a commercial DAB station end up paying them anything? And don't insult our intelligence by saying that we pay by buying stuff from the companies that advertise.

Hot air... Hot air.

[An_Inspector_Calls]

RM: try post 11 - which you've cited several times already. You pay for commercial broadcasting through the advertising costs passed on to the products you buy - where else is the money coming from, Santa Claus?

Teamsaint: I've said nothing about DRM .

EA: absurd.

[teamsaint]

RM: try post 11 - which you've cited several times already. You pay for commercial broadcasting through the advertising costs passed on to the products you buy - where else is the money coming from, Santa Claus?

Teamsaint: I've said nothing about DRM .

EA: absurd.

Well its the only thing I have talked about on this thread, so I can't understand why you are questioning what I said.
In any case, do you not think its pretty relevant to the big picture here?

[Bryn]

Trouble is, when talking of digital radio there are at least two DRMs, i.e. Digital Radio Mondiale and Digital Rights Management. Then there's DRC too (Dynamic Range Control), which I seem to recall was at one time also referred to as "Dynamic Range Management". I guess it's Digital Rights Management which is at issue here.

[teamsaint]

Trouble is, when talking of digital radio there are at least two DRMs, i.e. Digital Radio Mondiale and Digital Rights Management. Then there's DRC too (Dynamic Range Control), which I seem to recall was at one time also referred to as "Dynamic Range Management". I guess it's Digital Rights Management which is at issue here.

yup. As far as I am concerned. its the only thing I have read anything about on the subject.(and VERY interesting it is too , if folks have the time).
Sorry for any acronym based confusion. !!

[Resurrection Man]

RM: try post 11 - which you've cited several times already.

Round and round in circles. You make unsupported statements in post 11. There is nothing in the available data in the PwC REDACTED report to back up what you are saying.

You pay for commercial broadcasting through the advertising costs passed on to the products you buy - where else is the money coming from, Santa Claus?

....

I did ask you not to insult our intelligence.

I'm out of this discussion with you...utterly pointless. Like trying to nail jelly to a tree.

[Resurrection Man]

yup. As far as I am concerned. its the only thing I have read anything about on the subject.(and VERY interesting it is too , if folks have the time).
Sorry for any acronym based confusion. !!

I see where you are coming from....you can't apply DRM (or charge) anything in the analogue domain!

(iPlayer has a form of embedded DRM in it in so far as anything you have downloaded to view at a later date will become unviewable after a certain date if that is what they wish. Just thought I'd mention that!)