The AM Forum

This issue has been a hot topic of discussion and debate in broadcast rags for some time now, but I have seen very little mention on mainstream media.  I rarely listen to commercial stations, AM or FM, so I don't know if they are alerting their listeners, but if not, they ought to be.

The recording industry wants to impose a performance tax that would financially hurt local radio stations, stifle new artists and harm the listening public who rely on free local radio.

Senators Blanche Lincoln (D-Arkansas) and John Barrasso (R-Wyoming), along with Representatives Gene Green (D-Texas) and Michael Conaway (R-Texas), and many other members of Congress have sponsored legislation and efforts against the performance tax.  Others still need to hear from constituents.

For more than 80 years, radio and the recording industry have enjoyed a mutually beneficial relationship: free play for free promotion. The relationship has sustained businesses on both sides.

But like many businesses, the record labels are struggling in this economy, plus they have failed to adapt to the digital age. So now they want to impose a fee called a performance tax on local radio stations every time a song is played.

This would threaten the local radio stations financially, stifle new artists and harm the listening public who rely on free local radio. The money generated from the performance tax would flow into the pockets of the major record labels, three out of the four of which are foreign-owned. The record labels would like for you to think the fee would go to compensate artists, but in truth the record labels would get at least 50 percent of the proceeds.

This tax would reduce the variety of music radio stations play, and prevent new artists from breaking onto the scene. The tax would particularly affect smaller stations, some of which may end up switching to a talk-only format if they don't shut down entirely.

http://www.noperformancetax.org/Radio%20at%20Risk

The cure: do local programming and a national 100% station boycott on taxable programming. without outlets they have nothing.

 Radio pays ASCAP fees.

Steve said:
That is what I thought. Our local FM station has tried for the last year and a half to get some response from Rep. Paul Kanjorski with out so much as an acknowledgement. In light of that, they are stumping to have him removed from office during this year's election. What gets me is do the record companies think everyone is going to pay premium prices for just to listen to their offerings? If I were a recording label company, I would think that the radio stations would be my ally by 'showcasing' their products/artists. With all the digital means available, I don't think there is one person out there recording off the air!

I recall in the mid 60's when I worked at a small 1 kw daytimer, a local singer-songwriter approached the station. He wanted to record one of his songs and have it played on the radio.  The PD stated that they paid ASCAP a fee and ASCAP maintained a monopoly on recorded music.  The station could have invited the singer-songwriter to do a live performance, but they could not play a recording of his songs because every song on the playlist had to be licensed through ASCAP. This shut the door in the face to independent original composers. If the station had violated the licence agreement, ASCAP could have pulled their permission to play any commercial records.

Don, were you a jock, or strictly engineering talent?

if you did on the air stuff, did u use a DJ name ...... like Disco Don?  :D

The writing has been on the wall for radio as a music delivery system for at least a decade due to file sharing. The fact is that there is an entire generation of kids growing up who see no use for radio, don't own radios, and for whom some of the terms we take for granted like "dial", or "tune" are foreign. Younger people are carrying I-pods, souped-up cell phones, and other mobile devices with music storage capabilities. The death of broadcast radio for music will mean nothing to them since they don't go to radio now to hear new releases. Those kids are the future of traditional radio, and it only means death.

The other game changer that will kill off terrestrial radio, and probably DTV, cable, and remaining traditional telephone service, is Wi-Max Wireless Broadband. This technology is growing rapidly. Last year Verizon announced they were getting out of the local telephone business within the next decade. At the same time they announced plans to deploy a new high speed Wireless Broadband 4G network with 100% coverage in the lower 48 states. The rollout has already begun in select markets. Unlike Wi-Fi with coverage of maybe 100 meters, Wi-Max/4G will cover up to 30-miles fixed and 10-miles mobile, and will be used as a universal backbone into the Internet.

We are at the dawn of a new age of universal service like the telephone network was in 1920. Verizon sees only declining profits in offering landline and mobile telephone service, so they have begun to cede that business to Skype, Vonage, and myriad other VoIP companies. Verizon is converting itself into a connectivity provider, they know where the future is and it’s in wireless broadband and mobile devices.  What this means for traditional radio, DTV, etc is a long downward death spiral once people discover that they can access to their own multi-media servers at home and watch video and listen to music from anywhere in the world on their mobile handheld. This will create a market for dockable systems connecting into big screen HD displays with multi-channel audio systems. Radio and TV stations that adapt by turning themselves into Internet based content providers have a chance of surviving, but this also means that anybody with streaming software can become a radio and TV station. I’m not sure how the business model we are used to in broadcasting will continue to work in the new environment.

This stuff is not a pipe dream as the 4G deployment is already underway, and much further along in some foreign countries. The days of a big stick transmitter for local radio/TV are pretty much over. Verizon and other broadband carriers will soon be providing transmission facilities for those who are willing to make the transition.

73, Jim
WA2AJM/3

Whatever they do, I hope they improve the abysmal quality of digital cellphones and other compressed digital audio sources such as MP3s...

short wave BC, same thing.

Hi all:

Jim made very good points.

With WIMAX, free over the air ("OTA" these days) radio is dead. Same with TV. There are a group of companies that are lobbying Congress to have the broadcast TV frequencies taken away from broadcasters and sold to these internet firms for wireless Internet access. As the Gummint is so strapped for cash, I feel this will be approved.

So your public airwaves will be privatized soon. Pony up the $$$ to view reality TV.......

http://broadcastengineering.com/news/Genachowski-favors-broadcasters-relinquish-spectrum-20100224/

Dan

Yes it's true that Commissioner Genachowski is no friend of DTV. He is on record as saying DTV is a waste of spectrum. The nationwide wireless broadband companies have fine lobbyists with much bigger budgets than the National Association of Broadcasters. That's why I see HD Radio, DTV, and even the new Mobile DTV as being transitional technologies that will soon be eclipsed and consigned to the ashheap of history. Of course, the broadcasting industry will be in complete denial while this is happening, and move much too late.

Kind of interesting is that the "pay for access" aspect of this change will be a reversion to the way things worked prior to the invention of radio. Back then you paid for your entertainment and news.

The sleeping giant about to awaken is 4G/Wi-Max. This is exciting stuff as it is not just a new form of Shortwave with pictures, it's the Swiss Army knife of telecom. All the technology you need or want to conduct your life will be in the palm of your hand. Sure, cell phone service stinks now in many places, but they were saying the same thing about electrical power service 80-90 years ago. There have been a few improvements since then.

73, Jim
WA2AJM/3

Well Diana an I are learning very quickly just what I can an Can't have on this fixed Income...

Man I miss my Job...

73
Jack.

Jim:

While we cannot stop progress, the FCC has been promoting other services at the expense of free OTA radio and TV for decades. The FCC was originally an engineering group that was replaced with lawyers creating technical regulation, thus the wireless consortium will win over, at the expense of the consumer.

Having spent 25+ years in broadcasting, I have a historical background while working very hard to stay abreast of the latest technology. From a broadcaster's point of view, the re-mapping of TV spectrum was an economically difficult transition that had no economic gain (actually heavy costs on the average of $10m per station) for the broadcaster.  This latest selling of the public's spectrum is obviously the nail in the coffin for us. And yes, I agree that the NAB provides too little too late. Take for instance the Mobile DTV push that is happening right now (I helped implement it at our station)-I feel this is technically flawed technology (i.e. 8vsb in a moving environment) that is arriving a bit too late, while 3g is already in place serving the iPhone crowd.

The WiMax idea can be a good thing, but I feel they can do it without taking the broadcaster's spectrum. My guess is the re-farming of broadcaster's spectrum is a move to squash competition for entertainment, and at the same time, yet another free service becomes a paid....err "service". How much local content will these Internet providers create?

So those on a fixed income will not be able to get free entertainment, but more importantly access to emergency information and public service as the rules for license ownership were originally based on (yes also originally it was accepted as a blatantly commercial service). WiMax will widen the gap between the have's and the have not's, and allow for more complete surveillance of the end user.

Also it is my opinion that once spectrum is sold in any way, the FCC really has no leg to stand on regarding regulation.

Will the new users of this valuable spectrum be required to hold to the same rules for emergency alert, profanity and public service as the broadcasters currently do? I think not.

Is this proposed re-farming in the public interest, convenience or necessity?

Dan

 

that is a very wrong practice. Sets up ASCAP as some kind of pimp that new or would-be artists should have to pay. Ridiculous - An artist should be the one to say if their recordings can be played, not some filing-cabinet mafia.

Maybe it's a moot point. The best outcome might be to end up with the AM BC band intact, with a mix of news, niche, country &western, small market stuff. I'm not holding my breath for any of it. I do not want the AM & FM analog broadcasts to cease, as I enjoy them and I am willing to pay for it by listening to the commercials. But I can't see changing my situation to pay twice (listening to ads and paying a bill) for the same thing.. I'll just stop listening if it costs money, like I quit watching 99% of TV because it's crap. Funny, TV is not interesting, but I still like to listen to AM BC radio stations.

Dan,

The “public interest, necessity, and convenience” is a quaint relic from a bygone age. The final nail in its coffin was the updated Communications Act of 1996.

I have also been in radio and television engineering since 1979, so I tend to agree with your observation that the FCC has changed for the worse regarding its policies toward broadcasting. The transition seems to have kicked off slowly in the mid 1970’s when the FCC began to be packed with politicians and lawyers who tend to form a symbiotic relationship with their friends the lobbyists. Now not a single FCC commissioner has an engineer on their staff anymore. Jim Quello was the last actual broadcaster to be picked as a commissioner, and there will probably be no other. A former engineering co-worker of mine came from the FCC, and I understand the morale is quite low among the engineers that remain.

I’m not sure the future is so bleak except for those who plan to do business as usual.  I mentioned universal service.  How many people today can’t afford to keep a telephone or at least one OTA TV?  The pricing of broadband and related hardware will drop as the market saturates which will make access affordable for everyone. I can also foresee some kind of enforced mandate that will make basic telecommunications service affordable to even plain old poor folks who will need it as a lifeline much as they do now with telephones. I think security concerns are legitimate, but the NSA has supposedly been intercepting all our e-mail, satellite traffic, telephone calls, and faxes for the last 20-years under their Project Echelon with only a few token protests raised. Perhaps we just need better encryption, and more people with the testicular fortitude of Phil Zimmerman to give it away for free like he did with PGP.

As for free entertainment, plenty will remain unless you really want to pay for premium services such as new movie releases, or an electronic newspaper subsctiption. Two of my old college friends already run their own music radio stations out of their homes 24/7 as a hobby. I tend to spend a lot of my time online reading bloggers as opposed to regular media outlets. Many free web resources will be available for news and entertainment because those sites will want to remain free. The only danger to this scenario is if the broadband industry converts to a fee charged on bandwidth use as opposed to the flat monthly connection fee we enjoy now. There have been rumors of the industry pushing for this, but I think it would suffer the same fate as per minute charges on old-style dial-up connections. In any case, I think localism will survive and thrive because people will not need to jump through FCC hoops to obtain a license, they will just need a broadband connection and some basic hardware to become a radio or TV station. It could all prove to be quite democratizing if things get that far.

73, Jim
WA2AJM/3

Oh yes. About stopping the refarming of TV channels for broadband. It's pointless because the kids aren't watching much TV either. They are already upstairs on their parent's broadband connections or listening to their I-Pods. Local TV will survive, but it will have to stream to survive the coming shakeout. I think there will be a 20 year overlap of old and new technologies, but even that might be a generous estimate. Meet me back here in 2030 and we'll compare notes!
73, Jm
WA2AJM/3  

Guys, let's keep this outstanding discussion going by avoiding political commentary IAW the forum rulez...

Jim:

(JN: Sorry if I am stepping over the line here. This is a technically based discussion, that has political underpinnings. This may come to ham radio some day)

Thanks for the interesting discussion!

I think we'll see the end of OTA broadcast TV within ten years.

PICON was an old idea, but it helped to provide some public service to the consumer. A main point is that the rules unequally limited broadcasters (in my research since the 1960's) for many decades. And yes, the Comms act of '96...ask Clear Channel and the local daytimer radio station how much local programming can be economically done. Are you happier with the radio programming today as compared to before '96?

As far as the market lowering pricing on Internet delivery, I have not seen a dropping of subscription pricing for CATV, Internet or cell phones for decades. I do not feel that WiMax will be any different as it probably will be some form of single supplier market that the above services enjoy.

As far as local programming is concerned, you are forgetting that in order to view such Internet based content, one needs to pay for an Internet connection and provider-this is not free as OTA is now. While most people can afford Internet service, OTA radio and TV is one area that was, and to my mind should continue to be free. RF is a public asset just as our state parks are.

I feel that the quality of any Internet based local programming will be quite limited by the lower revenue gained as compared to OTA TV say 20 years ago. This is just the splintering of the audience by more avenues as well as suppliers of content. Could one Internet blogger hire a team of news or investigative reporters and journalists? Will that blogger be a trained journalist or could it be someone with an alterior motive? Could the Internet media effectively provide an effective form of checks and balances to the government if needed (via essentially government controlled Internet gateways)? While the blogger can easily be more dynamic than local TV stations or newspapers, I am concerned that the money will not be there to support even the most basic efforts at true journalism.

The broadband alliance taking TV frequencies is a strong point for me personally as it promises to end my career, or make it as valuable as working at McDonalds. They could do this with the available frequencies that are not in use. Once TV stations go off the air through their own attrition, then GET A LICENSE and serve the public with WiMax. Here nobody get stepped on and there is a regulatory mechanism built in. The marketplace gets to decide.

Publicly, I resent having to pay for my media as I, like you and your parents, have had the option to receive it for free (I choose to have an Internet connection-I could live without it if I had to). This, along with CATV and cell phones are yet another bill we pay if we want the services. Our parents did not have to pay these bills. To have all this media costs between $100-$200.00/month. Can someone working part time afford to pay for this, as they will not have OTA TV and radio available?

Yeah, I know I cannot stop progress, but this technical progress is not necessarily progress for the consumer.

Your friends running Internet radio stations-do they pay the RIAA fees? As you know, on another thread here, there is discussion of new pay-for play legislation. I'd like to run an Internet station (originally it was LPFM, until NPR and the NAB killed it due to "third adjacent interference" concerns), but cannot afford to pay the RIAA the fees for a hobby effort.

Hope ya do not mind my ranting...

Thanks,
Dan

My apologies for making a political comment.  :-[

Phil - AC0OB

every time there is new tech thats better, the complete doom of the old tech it replaced is predicted. It almost never happens. The old tech scales back and retrenches and adopts as best it can, and if it can adopts part of the new tech to supplant itself.

The main reason is that people are stubborn bastards who like things the way they are used to it. When radio came along, the demise of newspapers was imminent - and there was a scaleback. Same thing with the internet - no more news papers, right? they are hurting bad, but a awful lot of people still just have to have that morning paper. When TV came along, radio was obsolete. but you cant watch TV when driving, so radio became a mobile medium.

Unless dictated by government fiat, we'll still have OTA radio for many years, for no other reason than that some people simply want it that way.

I'd say the demise of amateur radio is coming far faster than any other form. There's no built in industry or monetary base to keep it going, and the OT's are dying off in droves with no one to replace them. We are lucky that the HF bands are so useless and filled with noise and unpredictable and prone to sunspot cycles and magnetic disturbances. otherwise we would have been gone quite a while ago.

You raise some very interesting questions, but I'm basically addressing Derb's points here. There will be a retrenchment of sorts for radio and TV which will take place during the transition period I described.  I think the economics of the situation will be such that we’ll see a large number of weak and marginal radio stations simply sign-off because they will never again be profitable in their present form with a bunch moving to streaming. I think this will happen as a simple matter of Darwinism. How long it will take is anybody’s guess, but there are too many stations OTA right now for all of them to make money thanks to Docket 80-90 which flooded the FM band with several thousand new stations beginning in the mid 80’s. Part of a broadcast license’s value was always in its scarcity and limited entry into the business. That value has now been diluted in a number of different ways.

Outside of some top markets like NYC, Chicago, or LA, AM radio is basically a rich man’s hobby with 3X the expenses at 1/3 the revenue of FM. Daytime only AM stations are a hopeless case with the real estate value of the tower site often exceeding the stick value of the license and broadcast assets several times over. Many FM stations are economic basket cases too simply because the local advertising pie has been sliced too many ways. The big radio groups have circled the wagons by creating clusters of stations in most markets in an attempt to even the odds of capturing what media revenue there still is. The result has generally been that one or two stronger stations carry three or four weak sisters on their backs. What will kill off most terrestrial radio will be when 4G reaches about 75% penetration, and the station owners wake up realizing they don’t need to worry about defending their licenses from the FCC and the expense of maintaining a transmitter plant and tower anymore. Verizon and T-Mobile will give them all the coverage they want for free, and the transmitter comes with nationwide reach. The station only needs an Internet connection. Some residual terrestrial radio may survive for decades or longer in the form of micro-broadcasters, or community based public radio, but it will all be local and probably listener supported.

I think OTA DTV will retrench mainly to local news and public affairs, streamed via Internet. Local TV is already facing the same problem as radio with its audience disappearing to other media.  The nightly network newscasts are watched by fewer people every year, and the audience is aging. TV and radio will be part of a convergence that ends with them using the same delivery platform for fixed and mobile reception, namely 4G/Wi-Max. I can see the staffs of local TV stations shrinking considerably, but I think local news will keep some viability in what remains. TV station owners will also wonder why they need to worry about huge power bills, replacing expensive IOTs, and limiting themselves to their present coverage areas. Once the 4G networks are up, and the consumers have hardware in their hands, TV will begin to switch off and stream. TV is also in a pickle with regard to advertising just like radio. 

Derb pointed out that people are stubborn, and they want what they want. This is true, and also part of the reason why younger people are deserting radio and TV. Those people are never coming back if they were ever there in the first place. Dinosaurs will not inherit the future. Mobile DTV is already a reality, and car radios with Internet are about to be marketed next year. Terrestrial radio became king of the mobile listener, but it is about to be dethroned. Much the same goes for Mobile DTV which will be only transitional until 4G saturates, then it will be gone. Why should people worry about owning an HD Radio, a DTV receiver, a Moble DTV, an I-Pod, and a cell phone when they can get it all on the same device?   

73, Jim
WA2AJM/3

Dan,

No harm ranting. To your point on access costs, the difference with the 4G I think will be universal service.  This does not exist now with present cellular 2G/3G, cable, satellite, etc which are all niche service providers. Your local  phone company is about to abandon phone service as we know it because no local phone company expects to make money providing subscriber loops or local dialtone anymore.  Vonage and Skype have clearly won that war. With local phone service out of the picture, there will be some changes needed for ISPs which will include public service obligations to provide pricing plans for barebones telecom service for telephony, to guarantee access to 911 call centers, and life sustaining issues, whatever.

As far as Wi-Max coming from a single supplier, I do not think it will be true.  That’s why they are now talking about paying DTV stations to voluntarily hand in their licenses so they can grab the spectrum for broadband. They expect and will demand competition which will tend to drive prices lower. Cable and telephone are basically local monopolies  now, but that probably won’t be the case with Wi-Max in the long run.

As for the entertainment aspect of broadband I have some sympathy. However I mentioned that historically people have paid for their news and entertainment. The public has gotten a free ride for 90 years because many radio stations were set up by companies to create a demand for radios, and the practice of free OTA programming carried over to TV for that reason as well as PICON.   While you can rightly argue that airwaves are a public asset, the FCC long ago offered channels for sale to the highest bidder for private and public commercial use. The same argument could be used to eliminate cellular airtime charges, but the precedent has been set.

I think the concerns over quality and professionalism in Internet based offerings will be settled in the marketplace. People will willingly pay for quality content and news from organizations maintaining professional standards as they do now.

I don’t believe my Internet radio friends pay ASCAP or BMI fees because it is a hobby with no advertising or money changing hands.  I will have to ask them though. One mainly has a jukebox running under automation software streaming two stations with one being oldies, and the other classic rock.  The second guy is into jazz.

73, Jim
WA2AJM/3

Interesting discusion.
My internet feedback for typing is slow this morning.  tough on editing,  ;D
so;

Considering the high cost of 'big-stick' transmitters, stations and equipment:

Cell towers in there own right are very expensive propositions.  Site leasing fees or outright land purchase are expensive.  The frequencies used predicate much faster weather and corrosion degradation of facilities, cable and equipment.  Talk about tubes being archaic and degradable, VHF, UHF and microwave stuff has its delicate aspects too.

So for a wifi environment for streaming to work we're looking at zillions of smaller relay sites, stuff located on a lightpole near you.

Such sites are very easily sabatoged, with rocks if nothing else.  Keep all the politics you want out of our discussions, the fact is that communications, media, 'broadcasting' in any form is a very human activity subject to all the whims and final judgement of the masses, governmental or commercial control not withstanding.

The future will be interesting.

My whole Life I watched one TV Channel and listened to One Radio Station at a time.

I never needed any of this expanded crap, I don't respect being thought for, and don't care for being told what I need. 8) 4 G 5 G who cares, only folks an business that have set themselves up for all this need it, an the pressure is on, so the rest of us get dragged along handed what we got,... here,.. play with this an be quiet look at the speed you have, Big Deal....

Interesting comments though, an I learned a little....that's what's important I appreciate the Info.


Stay Connected  8)

73
Jack.

Well Jack, yes. If something's really interesting, one devotes all their attention to it, be it video, a book or M13 through a large aperture telescope, whether it be 'virgin' photons through an ocular or via the computer screen....   as you know  ;D

And, quite right; if multi-tasking does one thing it shortens attention span and perhaps reasoned,anaylitical ability.

So we must stay connected to the latest buzz, um hmmm, most derived from HBS post partum lingo.

Absolutely,
Clearly,
Going forward,
Having said that,
..ad absurdium.

I guess language does change; witness "prior to" instead of simply "before" after ;D John Dean's testamony in the Watergate 'trials.'

What is interesting is that I beleive it was Don, K4KYV, raised the specter of WiMax on this very forum 4 or 5 years ago!

Hi Rick,  :D

 As always well said, well put,...But I still watch one channel at a time an listen to one station at a time, I are a stick in the mud.....

 No the New Backbone is fine I don't have a problem with getting that done, accomplished, things have grown....

But I do like how it's presented like toys to the John Q. Public, here play with this phone, Ipod whatever, it's the latest thing.....the latest Tech...now pay the latest Fee... LOL  Like the elimination of Pay Phones, why let them pay just for the use, charge them for everything....all the eggs in one basket...

Hey by the way Rick did you read that article in the paper about Allegheny Power being bought out,  More Monopolism Brother coming up right in front of our eyes.

73
Jack.

Jim:

I have to say you are an astute person with good observations and predictions!

While I bemoan what the FCC has done in the past (yes I agree precedent was set by the previous sale of spectrum), your comments about 89-90 diluting the value of the medium are accurate and the transition to wireless seems very plausible.

I agree that the transition will probably be staged, but at this time see one supplier per city, possibly even nationwide, thus a monopoly on prices. I do hope that some form of reverse 911 or a better form of EAS is provided.

Local news will be provided, probably by the local newspaper, but I also see it's capability more limited due to less revenue.

Two years ago I asked a woman in her thirties about her TV viewing. She told me she watched all her media on the Internet and did not know the call letters of the local TV stations in Boston. At that time I knew the audience had essentially left broadcasting. Us broadcasters are indeed surviving on the older traditional viewers, and I tend to be one of them. However once I opened my eyes as to where young people are and how they are using media, I saw the future. To me it is "follow the people"-and it is all Internet.

At the station I work at now, we have an extremely dynamic Internet presence, and that is one of the reasons I elected to work there. We also use all media to it's fullest capability, but when OTA dies, I see a major shrinkage in what we do and the revenue we can pull in. At that time, I'll probably need to re-tool for another career. I am expecting this.

As far as your friends' Internet radio...I believe they are required to pay RIAA fees. College stations and non profits have to, and it is less that commercial rates. I restore 78 RPM records as a hobby and thought of starting an Internet station. Even though most of the music is public domain, the thought of my having to justify my efforts to the RIAA (and my lazyness!) has calmed me down to the idea.

Thanks for the good discussion!!

73
Dan

I think it's a Shame, Down right Terrible Idea.....

Radio is Not radio on the internet, it's piped in media in my limited view.

During the storm The Cell tower developed issues, the Direct TV sig went off for a few hours, and we had no Grid Electricity.

I have an old Briggs an Stratton Two socket generator..kept the house warm we cooked on a small grill put the juice where we needed it...worked FB an earned a special spot in my Garage for it's undying operation the thing is better than 20 years old and was a gift from a close friend some years back, never used it much, once or twice a year I ran it checked the oil changed the gas often regular maintenance, our grid was out 4 days.



An we had Terrestrial Radio on the air when we needed it, I hate to think that the ones with all this foresight in these business's being discussed here are considering everything wireless tech on these machines, the local paper is useless in a storm, I would be more than just a little upset without some type of radio reception....Cell Phones are a Handy little device But,..I'm not putting anymore trust than that in them...no Sir.

73
Jack.

I'm really a conservative Jack, but I try to keep an open mind and put things in perspective.  ;D

Concerning the Power co'.s merger, buy Alleghenie's stock now.  Based on personal experinece, CNG into Va. Power, now Dominion, CNG's stock (renamed) doubled in a few years and is one of the few that held steady or gained back through the last couple of big crashes,(9/11 and 2008/9/10.)

But the mention of emergency generators makes me think that power outages, no matter where we live seem to occur more often and last longer than those of even REA's early days.  Maybe just seems so, I"ll have to see if some decent data is documented somewhere.

So communications, basic utility services, gasoline prices, whatever can go into "defib" just like hearts right before the major crash?

Hi Rick,

I wana say me too but I do like Technology to much it's not good to be to conservative in that respect. I Appreciate the Tip on the Stock I was thinking about their Stability and you have answered that question..TNX....But what a Conglomerate Huh....Awesum....WOW.

It's a Cool little generator My buddy gave me Can't run to much on it, Just two 115v lines, it was GREAT for Field Day..I had told him back then I'd rebuild it for him an give it back, ya know New Valve seats, new Valves Hone the cylinder check for roundness an a New set of Rings....an he says ah just keep it you might need it one Day.... ;D I called him on the Twisted pair after things settled down an told him what happened and How Thankful we were.....He say's "See I told you to listen to me"....LOL....

Amazing

73
Jack.

One thing to consider is that there is quite a bit more infrastructure now than in the early REA days. The population of the country has increased by 50 to 100 million people.

If you limit all your playlist to public domain material, you don't have to "justify" anything.  Tell the RIAA bullys to get lost.

I hope the gubment allows the tax; the commercial stations will stop promoting the air pollution that most of them emit & the pirate stations will start popping up. I will listen to AM 740 from Toronto & the pirates. The greedy record label companies will get NUTTIN and starve.

I doubt that will happen.  OTA radio will become even more irrelevant as listeners turn more and more to iPods, WiMax, streaming audio and other digital media.

And that is NOT "radio".  It is more akin to "Rediffusion" (http://www.rediffusion.info/) that was tried in Europe before WW2. 

Reports of death of radio/tv greatly exaggerated or however it was Mark Twain put it  ;D

1.  The idea everything must go away if kids aren't using it doesn't hold water in my opinion.  Might happen eventually but not any time soon.   

2.  Actually off-air TV viewing has had a minor increase because of DTV.  I bet everyone knows at least one or two people who have dumped cable because now they can get the channels they watched before but for free and with equal to cable or better picture quality off-air. 

3.  FM radio as a music source may be vulnerable but not only because kids don't listen to radio.  It occupies a part of the spectrum that can be used for high-techy stuff.  The thing saving AM radio is ...what else are you gonna do with 200 meters on down (this is what's saving HF ham radio too)?   That doesn't mean radio won't change.  Sure stations will go away and formats will have to change.   I see more AMs as local information conduits--news and local event coverage.  Amazingly (to me because I have zero interest in sports) some AMs are killing with the sports talk format.  The trick is delivering a unique audio program of interest that people will grow into.  When I was a kid the last thing I wanted to listen to was an all-news station.  Now as an O.F., a lot of my listening time is spent with the local CBS owned news outlet.  When young people become property owners; parents...their focus shifts.  the broadcast industry will take advantage of that.

For now, they have a heck of a bully pulpit when it comes to making voters aware of what is happening that is a detriment to their free information and entertainment access.

Rob   

I would not mind this at all.  I would love to see all the Clear Channel's and other conglomerates leave the radio business forever.

here's a interesting angle on the performance tax from Barry Mishkind's broadcasting email reflector:

Message: 8
Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2010 12:20:23 -0500
From: Tom Spencer <Radiofreetom@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [BC] the 'radio performance tax'
To: broadcast@radiolists.net
Message-ID: <4B93E057.5070802@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed

If it passes, the correct response for stations that may want to
continue broadcasting music is to charge the record labels at the
regular (non-discount) spot rate for airing their three-minute
commercials. This will generate enough revenue to more than offset any
"tax" the labels think they're owed.

The excess could then be used to hire studio musicians to perform
whatever songs the Big Labels don't want to pay for.

Any record company type person who asks me about the PRA...

I tell 'em, "Fine.  Then the songs get treated as whet they are,
commercials for your product.  My station's ratecard is..."

The NAB needs to stress this when buttonholing Congresscritters - the
free airplay of Big Label Music amounts to free commercial airtime.

And since the vast majority of listeners are in major markets (>100) and
most stations in large markets have ratecards in excess of $100 / :60...

A stroke of genius!

Back in the dark ages when I used to work at a 1 kw daytimer (part-time chief engineer) the record companies were begging the stations for airplay.  The stations didn't have to go out and buy the 45's; the labels sent promo copies as junk mail.  We had more free vinyl than we could have ever played even if we had been allowed a 24/7 format. We took some home; others were used as coasters and Frisbees.

This was expressed in lyrics from a now-forgotten rock group that gained tremendous popularity during the mid-60's, named Paul Revere and the Raiders:

And all you stations across the nation
Please play our records for your congregation...

http://www.onewest.net/~roxtar/lyrics/revere_paul2.html

Yes, let's get the conglomerate out of broadcasting - like GE, ABC, CBS, and NBC. Those clowns have been killing it for years.

Do they even have NBC, CBS and ABC radio networks any more? The radio conglomerates now are mega-monopoly Clear Channel and, well, uh, who are its competitors?

Yeah Don, and if the RIAA boys get uppity, we'll just tell them we're going to play all their stuff over the air using NARTB equalization.  Won't that just tin their ears.? ;D

They still control the programming. Disney owns tons of networks too. CC is no where near a monopoly and far less than CBS and NBC back in the day. Lots of huff and puff about CC but it's mostly from haters.

here's a start. free of copyrights, fresh off the ol plattenspieler.. The sound will need restoring I guarantee it.
http://www.bunkerofdoom.com/mp3/dir.html

haha I'd love to pirate. It would be the closest thing existing today to a small AM station where the engineer is respected. Too bad it's so easy for the FCC to find the pirates these days. And won't do it because it's against the law.

nbc radio no longer exists. as a matter of fact, NBC didnt even care about it's chimes - there's no trademark or servicemark protection on them outside of the TV operations. Anybody can use the chimes on radio. No one wants to, because it's still one of the most recognized corporate identifications in the world.

I use this as my email notification on the computers.

Clear Channel has 900 stations, Citadel who just filed for bankruptcy has around 250. ABC nominally still exists, CBS is still doing news, but I dont know anything else about their radio presence today.

NBC Radio network was sold to Westwood One by GE and they elected to terminate the brand a few years later. NBC Rado Network News was slowly phased out and died with a whimper.

After the sale of the network, NBC sold off its remaining O&O stations in 1988. I became the director of engineering at 660 the former flagship in NYC, and on the day the station changed ownership we had a ceremonial handoff of the NBC chimes. I still have mine complete with resonator box and mallet ;D

Incidentally the notes played by the chimes are G-E-C, supposedly for "General Electric Company" which was an original shareholder of RCA. What goes around comes around.

73, Jim
WA2AJM/3

AFAIK, CBS still owns and operates stations, maybe only the five original from back when they were limited to five, but I think at those stations, everyone is a CBS employee, and the content is mostly provided by the CBS radio news.  Now, CBS is I think owned by some big nasty corporation, Infinity maybe, can't remember.  This whole mess is what we get after years of corporate deregulation, the same climate that brought us globalization (thanks for all those garbage imported power supplies radiating noise like crazy), and airline deregulation (hey I can fly to Seattle cheap but I'm lucky if I get there alive). 

Rob

With respect to universal broadband access, it appears the Barbarians are at the gate. This Reuters article dated today is probably refering to Wi-MAX. I suspect I know where the bandwidth is coming from...

Reuters: U.S. Considers Some Free Wireless Broadband Service (9-Mar 2010)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100309/wr_nm/us_broadband_fcc_wireless


73, Jim
WA2AJM/3

no more emails to or from me. actually, no more internet for me if that happens.

It would be impossible to enfore this tax. E-mail users would only jump to some e-mail server located in Botswana. This proposal reminds me of how the Postal Service originally wanted to make it illegal for people to send a private fax from anywhere but a Post Office, and look at how far that one got.

73, Jim
WA2AJM/3

LOL.  The Internet has been taxed since the beginning of public ISPs. Wake up people.

It appears that somebody is saying they would tax all e-mail sent and received, with mail of International origin being taxed twice to the domestic recipient (or assigned a surcharge). I just don't see this being feasible because it means that all e-mail traffic would have to be audited for tax purposes by a middle-man or anyone who hosts their own mail server. I remember that Snopes had this email tax rumor some years ago, and basically quashed it. In light of the current public discontent, I think it's a political nonstarter.

For one thing it would eliminate all free e-mail and anonymous accounts, and convert Hotmail, Gmail, and the like to fee based plans which would only cause massive non-compliance from the average Joe as they escape overseas. To stop that, I suppose that possession of a foreign e-mail account would have to be elevated to the level of felony tax evasion which is beginning to sound a bit like Red China.

It would force all businesses of any size with their own mail servers to maintain audit records with Sarbanes-Oxley type auditing, reporting and security requirements. Basically it would cause many smaller and medium size businesses to have to outsource their e-mail to a hosting service. Many of the smallest ones already do this, but it will be an unwelcome expense to any non-publicly traded firms with their own mail servers.

Another option is to require routing of all e-mail traffic through servers belonging to the taxation authorities so it could be charged against your account and a bill e-mailed out every quarter. Lovely. From there it’s a slippery slope from having them intercept your e-mail, to having them reading it. 

I guess they would have to make spam illegal again in the process, and hunt down the remaining spammers like dirty rabid dogs, and/or create a spam exemption. I suspect there will be a lot more mail classified as “spam” in order to evade tax, which will then trigger random audits of e-mail content.  There goes any privacy that may be left, but maybe I’m just old fashioned.

73, Jim
WA2AJM/3

is this that hoax floating around on email?  there's been some b.s. like that for years that drifts around like the Neiman Marcus Cookie and all the other junk.   Always be skeptical of anything weird you only hear about via the internet, especially in the form of bulk forwarded chain type email.

http://www.snopes.com/business/taxes/bill602p.asp



rob

Business internet is bandwidth. It just routes packets based on the destination address in the IP packet header. It's a different story if the ISP does e-mail hosting for a business or individual. ISP's would need to retool to sniff the packet data for a  mail protocol and then save the it to your account. Hackers will have short work coming up with middleware to circumvent that.

I just don't see the idea working, but maybe I'm not as cunning as the tax man. There are too many escape routes for people, it would basically require registering all e-mail accounts with an authority. Then there will be unfunded mandates for businesses that in their weakened state they won't want to absorb. We would become a nation of outlaws, and the country a police state.

I have it on good authority that kids don't use e-mail, it's too "last century" for them.  They use Instant Messenger, Twitter, and social networking sites like Facebook and Myspace to send messages. When the college kids get into the business world I've learned it's a bit of an adjustment for them to go back to dinosaur technology like e-mail. This means all the Facebook private mail, IMs and what not would also need to be audited and taxed to cut off the alternate escape routes. The kids are not going to want to pay for their Twitter and Facebook. I think I'm moving to Botswana to set up a data center.

73, Jim
WA2AJM/3

What Rob said  ;D

There are several email services that strip the originating IP from emails, so you can't trace them to the source computer.  Gmail, hushmail, and fastmail.fm are some.

I think the Twitter thing is silly. I don't want to waste my time keeping up with every detail of somebody else's life.

I had yoghurt and orange juice for breakfast.

I just took a shit.

But I remember a little program they used to have at work.  At the time they were all Apple computers, and the program was called Broadcast. You clicked on an icon and it brought up a list of every computer in the building, and you could access other buildings as well.  Then you clicked on a member on the list, and a little text box opened.  You typed in the message, and it would instantly pop up on the other computer.  The person on the other end could respond instantly.  Like Twitter, you were limited to a small number of characters per message.  Sometimes you would get messages broken up into several "broadcasts" in order to transmit the entire text.

Then they phased out Broadcast and went to regular email.  I found it cumbersome compared to Broadcast.

set disrupter on stun.

AM broadcast radio, like amateur radio, can be pretty low tech, robust against many hazards, and easily reestablished when compromised.  There is a definite need for this still in times of natural disaster or civil defense.

I remember the first time I ever stayed awake all night was when hurricane Camille hit in August of 1969.  I was 9 years old living in Gulfport MS one mile inland from the gulf.  You could feel the house shaking in the wind and around 11 that night the TV mast folded over in the center and was swinging dangerously close to the sliding glass door but never made contact.  The next morning the yard was covered with pecan limbs and snakes who had wandered up to high ground.

We made it home from vacation in the TN mountains late in the afternoon before the evening landfall and the winds were already beyond gale force and quickly got worse.  I remember my father's biggest concern was that the wind readings taken by the hurricane hunters were incorrect.  He was a civilian working in PMEL at Keesler AFB and was responsible for the group calibrating most of those instruments.  Although Katrina was geographically larger and did far more damage, I believe Camille still holds the record for the strongest wind associated with a U.S. mainland hurricane and at that time it was very surprising to see recorded wind in the 200 MPH range.

There is an interesting article in the online Popular Mechanics on Camille with some of the photos of the aftermath:

http://books.google.com/books?id=kdgDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA90&dq=popular+mechanics+hurrican+camille&cd=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false

The routing inof is stripped from the email headers. This does not mean the route cannot be determined. It will just be more difficult.

The ISP is taxed (payroll tax, tax on profits, etc). Those costs are passed on to the customer. We've all been paying an Internet tax since day one, unless we accessed the Internet via college or gov connection.

Oh you forgot the 'activities' fee in your college tuition.?
or did you think that was just for attending football games?  ;D

personally, I enjoyed the sor.house access.

Impossible to trace back to the user's ISP and IP, unless you subpoena the email provider or use a service like readnotify.

I dont believe people will accept a cellphone type payment and/or ISP tax system scheme on email service. of course the ISP's are taxed, it's not the same thing.

I probably came closest to tax-free internet back in the 80s. I didn't pay money to be on the UMaine campus, or for my account on their IBM 370. I probably learned more than 95% of the CS majors who went through there over the 20 years or so I was there.

I liked it better when DARPA was in charge. You didn't hear about identity theft, cyber-stalking, botnets, compulsive bloggers, or any of the other crap that (IMHO) was the result of opening it up to the masses before they were ready for it (and vice-versa).

Broadcast radio? Already dead. ASCAP, BMI, and RIAA? Trying to save themselves from drowning by thrashing even harder. They're modern-day Luddites, insisting that it's the consumers' fault that they steadfastly refused to even acknowledge the changing times, let alone keep up with them.

The only decisions any of them have left to make is whether or not to die with a modicum of dignity.

I too survived Camille...

but in New Orleans as a little JN.

I remember trees down in my back yard, and a big boat on the ground near the shore near Biloxi.

Dan

Howdy,

 I wonder what Advertising has to say about all this.

73
Jack.

 

It is, in fact, quite complicated when people don't use the email service the ISP gives you (ie POP servers) and instead use online email that strips the originating IPs, as I stated in my post.

And before you say, "well they can just track who logs on to gmail or fastmail", there are encrypted proxy services to get around the ISP tracking this sort of thing too.

If it gets that bad, which I doubt it will until everyone is forced to a standard type accepted computing appliance with Trusted Platform and DRM in order to connect to the internet, there are and always will things that exist right now for sending messages. any web page with pictures.. steganographs. or binary files to download. All that is needed is a simpletons' front end to cope with automating it and the problem is solved. The hackers, good and bad, won't need to spend 15 minutes writing that software. go to your friends' website and download their "cat picture of the day" and use your key to get the message intended for you extracted from the file. That is real obvious, so think of all the sneaky ways to do something essentially like that.

It is as well not to even worry about it. Worry about something serious like the impending doom from the comet. Let's just hope the BC band will remain, especially AM, for the sake of the beauty of the method and the simplicity to receive.

As I've said, there are many encrypted proxy services to get around any ISP limitations on where you can surf.  The ISP has no way of knowing your ultimate destination is an email service as all of the traffic, IP routing, etc., is handled by the encrypted proxy.

Brian, you are not accounting for offshore Web based email accounts. If I connect to them via a VPN or Onion routing, no one in this country will know I am sending and receiving email.

It would be impossible to force people to use their ISP email service. Using Onion routing is as simple as installing any other program. No technical expertise needed.

 ::) ::) ::)

It's even simpler than that.  Just log onto an encrypted proxy server (am I repeating myself?) and bypass any ISP-imposed restrictions.

 You all have to remember what totalitarian govt's are really like.  You'll have ISP cops and watchers just like block wardens,  they'll be delighted to report you, what they hear at the local pub, who's doing what, etc. Once the finger's pointed, the microscope peers ever deeper.

As usual those that comply, pay the tax; those that don't (provided they continue to not pay) drive up the tax for the rest of us.

LOL. You are being naive. The internet is not free. We've already discussed that.

Tons of non-taxed email services would spring up overseas. Unless the Feds stopped all access to servers outside the USA, any email tax would be easily sidestepped. State sales taxes are being sidestepped now with little or no effort.


Watch out for those black helicopters!

I always do, and this advice has served me well  ;D

I can't believe I just read someone saying "all it takes is for the FED to pass legislation".

Are you freakin' kidding me? There's legislation against child porn. There's legislation against stalking. There's legislation against harassment. All these things take place online and off, and legislation didn't do a goddamn thing to even slow it down, let alone stop it.

What is it that makes people think that making something law automatically makes everyone comply?

I see you need to watch out for those black helicompters there too, sonny  ;D! 

Black helicopters are so 90's.  Don't you realize they have been invisible and silent for years?  :)

But never fear, somewhere is a secret lab someone has almost cracked the secret of converting those 1950's Conelrad alarms into invisible helicopter detectors.  So make sure you look under the tables for one of these things at the next hamfest so you too will be prepared.

Now back to worrying about the government tracking me to a hamfest via OnStar.  Or just maybe there are enough real problems (like the lead I just broke on a 7805 regulator while I was repairing my CX-7A) that there really isn't time for imaginary ones.

How have the enforcement efforts gone? Has this stopped any and all spam in the state of Michigan? Have there been any child abductions or rapes in Michigan in the last five years?

If the answers are "poorly", "no", and "yes" (and I'll put money on all three), then your question about naivete' is answered.

Oh crap! I'm screwed!

Next you'll tell me they are contolling my mind via cell phone towers.

Looking at the Ce4ll coverage of zerizon why is there such a big hole in Nevada....sup wit dat.

73
Jack

Oooooh.
Well everybody knows that Nevada's just a big area 51, but have you seen the cell coverage hole over WVa.? 
It's the secret national park portion of the latest purloined 81 million acres.

Patrolled by translucent, invisible, light wave bending saucers, "donch'a know schonnies."_{tm, op. cit. 'HUZ et. al.}

Sshhh He's one of them.


klc

There is a positive side to this.

If somehow, someway, effectively applied, an email fee could create a problem for spammers. Even a penny per message could put them out of business.

I'm not going to beat this drum anymore, but I'm sure the link to this article will be of interest to some. Dated today, it talks about the FCC's plan for nationwide broadband by 2020.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/191438/fccs_national_broadband_plan_whats_in_it.html

The highlights of this new plan are:

"The FCC wants 100M bps service to be available to 100 million U.S. homes by about 2020."

"Over the next 10 years, the agency plans to identify 500MHz of wireless spectrum that can be freed up for wireless broadband service."

"The agency will propose a new program asking television stations to voluntarily give up unused spectrum in exchange for a portion of the proceeds when that spectrum is auctioned."

I have already read that some FCC staffers are proposing to pay DTV stations to voluntarily relinquish their licenses so that the TV band can be repacked and reduced yet again in favor of broadband technologies. In terms of regulatory support, OTA DTV appears to be a dead man walking.  




73, Jim
WA2AJM/3

Gotta say that I have no way to know how typical this is but when I drive around carloads of 10 year old girls they all want to listen to the "Q," a local station that plays Lady Ga Ga and The Black Eyed Peas endlessly (off a satellite feed I assume).   Anyway who said radio was dead to kids?   Is this speculation or is there some audience polling that says so?

Ed said:
O M G! I think I would rather jump penis first into a field full of cactus than listen to that stuff. That might be the reason for broadcast radio's rapid demise. Everything has to be suited to a niche and the variety has to be there. Without a doubt, if it wasn't for sports and talk radio the AM portion would be deserted.

Howdy,

I have three kidz. the oldest likes today's Pop, the middle daughter likes all country,(we side up alot in family arguments) and the Boy who's 14 talks to other people on this game box thing he has put together, it's some Live Army Battle thing on going, a little technical savvy there,I was proud of him when he wanted me to see it when he got it built.. and likes the black eyed peas deal. All on the radio's they have.

My Wife Listens to a Church station,...I wear Homey Tennis Shoes an listen to 1020 KDKA with my headphone set up when I do my 1 mile an a 1/2 as per Doctors orders.

73
Jack

Interestingly, I was skimming through some of the 1923 issues of Radio Broadcast that I just downloaded, and ran across an article on the topic of radio stations paying royalties when they play records over the air, virtually identical to what is being debated to-day.

I very rarely listen to any commercial broadcast station - AM or FM.  I mostly  listen to one of the three NPR FM outlets receivable in this area. During daylight hours I can also get one NPR AM station. In addition, mostly for the music they offer, I sometimes listen to one of the three non-affiliated university FM stations we can pick up. There is no classical or jazz played on any of the local commercial stations.  About the only commercial AM left with any class at all, is WSM in Nashville, but I am not particularly a fan of country music although I can take it in small doses.

Besides AM and FM, I play streaming audio from Radio France Internationale, and sometimes surf what else is streamed on the net. I still surf the SWBC bands, but no longer regularly listen to anything there.

I consider it a lot of TV if I watch more than two hours a week.  Mostly PBS, but occasionally some of the cable channels like National Geographic, but my cable choice is very limited since all I subscribe to is the bare-bones basic cable service, which offers little more than what you can pick up OTA  Once in a great while I surf the new OTA sub-channels, but about the only thing I find worthwhile there is PBS-2 during daytime, which offers something besides Sesame Street and other so-called "educational" programming for kids.

I hate the idea of paying for cable service and still having to watch commercials, but you do the same thing with newspapers and magazines - pay for the subscription and still there are ads.  But at least the ads in printed matter don't interrupt your reading unless you want them to.

I could get by without a TV in the house and not miss it.  My wife watches some of the stuff on commercial TV like American Idol, but I think it is a waste of time. But she doesn't keep the TV running all her waking hours as many of her friends do.

To put it bluntly, I have just about as much use for commercial radio and TV as I have for 75m slopbucket.

Best investment I ever made was the wireless headphones for the wife. Ten bucks at Big Lots and they are real comfortable. She can watch all the retard TV she wants and I dont have to be tortured with all the screaming and carrying on. I can melt solder in peace.

http://www.rabbitears.info/blog/index.php?post/2010/03/18/Opinion%3A-National-Broadband-Plan

Dream on.  Broadcast television, over the air TV, will not die until the Congress is convinced it is not needed to run campaign ads and reach the voters and get votes.  They just spent around a hundred million bucks on $40 coupons for converter boxes.   They decided when the changeover would be; not the FCC.  And all it takes to kill a bill is for one senator from a rural state to decide he has no other way to get to his voters in the sticks but over the air tv to get reelected, and it is game over for the whole country.  You seem to think the FCC can just do anything they want.  I have news for you, The Congress tells the FCC what to do through the Secretary of Commerce by calling him in to testify before flood lamps and flash bulbs and making his life miserable.    The Congress ultimately decides what goes into the United States Code; not the FCC.  Most of the time the FCC is allowed to follow their own rule development and procedure but the Congress can intervene whenever they want.   

I watch on average 30 minutes of TV / week.   I tape some public radio shows and listen to them at my convenience.  Most of my live radio is AM.  I love radio when it is analog AM on a good receiver. 

One of the more sensible proposals I have heard so far is to re-purpose TV  channels 5 and 6 to expand the FM broadcast band, and give AM daytimers and  local stations hampered by limited coverage the first shot at the new frequencies,  while leaving the AM band to a much smaller number of remaining regional stations, and to clear channel blowtorches with national night-time coverage.

Only a handful of TV stations across the country are still using those two channels, but their owners are screaming to high heaven in opposition to the proposal, and it appears NAB has come down on their side, even though there is plenty of vacant spectrum in other nearby abandoned VHF TV channels that they could easily move to.

This reminds me of the minuscule number of CW operators who still operate in the 40m segment between 7100 and 7125, but who cry holy hell whenever someone suggests expanding the phone segment down to 7100 following the  removal of broadcasters from 7100-7200.