Howard Stern's daughter Emily in nude role

[DiMaggio5CF]

Incorrect, why would satellite resort to a format that doesn't work?

Because they'll make more money that way and once FM radio is done, there won't be any competition for listeners to turn to instead?

[YankeePride1967]

Because they'll make more money that way and once FM radio is done, there won't be any competition for listeners to turn to instead?

FM isn't going to go away, just like CBS and NBC and ABC didn't go away when cable made it. Satellite radio is now like cable TV was in the late 1970's.

[hellonewman]

Incorrect, why would satellite resort to a format that doesn't work?

Because they'll make more money that way and once FM radio is done, there won't be any competition for listeners to turn to instead?

What he said.

[hellonewman]

FM isn't going to go away, just like CBS and NBC and ABC didn't go away when cable made it. Satellite radio is now like cable TV was in the late 1970's.

Right, which means satellite will co-opt much of the programming now appearing on "free" radio. With commercials.

[YankeePride1967]

What he said.

What I just said above. No need to worry, FM will be here for a long, long time.

[YankeePride1967]

Right, which means satellite will co-opt much of the programming now appearing on "free" radio. With commercials.

Not on the music they won't. Then there will be no need for anyone to pay for satellite. Satellite will never "co-opt" what's on FM. That's not how it works. You will never get XM or Sirius and be able to turn on WFAN.

[YankeePride1967]

And even if Satellite ever did "co-opt" the AM/FM stations (which it can't do), don't you think someone else will re-invent satellite radio without commercials? The one thing that separates satellite radio from cable is that you will never get your local radio stations on satellite radio like you get your local TV stations as part of your cable package. Satellite radio is limited in the amount of bandwidth it can transmit. It is impossible to "co-opt" FM/AM.

[hellonewman]

And even if Satellite ever did "co-opt" the AM/FM stations (which it can't do), don't you think someone else will re-invent satellite radio without commercials? The one thing that separates satellite radio from cable is that you will never get your local radio stations on satellite radio like you get your local TV stations as part of your cable package. Satellite radio is limited in the amount of bandwidth it can transmit. It is impossible to "co-opt" FM/AM.

As to the technological limitations of satellite, thanks, didn't know that. But I guess what I'm not seeing is why, if the advent of cable TV as a technology did not spell the end of commercials on cable-only offerings, why at some point satellite-only programming would be precluded from having commercials? For example, you can't get A&E Network by putting up an antenna, but you're sure as hell going to see commercials on it.

You can say the public won't stand for it, but the fact is, if they want the programming and can't get it anywhere else, they will. You mean if Sirius one day gets Howard Stern to read an ad one day for Joe's Auto, the Sternies are going to stop listening? The commercial-free aspect is an enticement. Very likely, a temporary one.

You can say someone else will then go and re-invent satellite without commercials, but that hasn't happened on the cable TV side, and if the satellite radio industry ever becomes wealthy and powerful enough to restrict the market the way cable providers have, it won't.

[Dooley Womack]

Will Howard Stern On Demand carry his entire Sirius show or just snippets like his E! Show? Also will it be current and shown the same day or at least the next?

[YankeePride1967]

As to the technological limitations of satellite, thanks, didn't know that. But I guess what I'm not seeing is why, if the advent of cable TV as a technology did not spell the end of commercials on cable-only offerings, why at some point satellite-only programming would be precluded from having commercials? For example, you can't get A&E Network by putting up an antenna, but you're sure as hell going to see commercials on it.

You can say the public won't stand for it, but the fact is, if they want the programming and can't get it anywhere else, they will. You can say someone else will then go and re-invent satellite without commercials, but that hasn't happened on the cable TV side, and if the satellite radio industry ever becomes wealthy and powerful enough to restrict the market the way cable providers have, it won't.

The biggest difference is with TV, there were only about a half dozen or so channels (maybe a dozen in the heavily populated areas) and cable TV is regionalized, satellite radio is nationalized and there are hundreds if not thousands of radio stations out there. I do think more and more people will go to satellite because terrestrial radio will continue to be slow to learn why satellite radio is becoming popular. Due to the sheer number of radio stations out there, it is not possible for them to be absorbed by satellite radio and not everyone will be willing/able to shell out the $13 a month it costs to get it. With that in mind, satellite radio will not be able to duplicate what Cable TV has done.

As long as there is AM/FM out there, there is no way Satellite Radio can charge $13 a month AND put commercials on the music stations. No one would pay for it. If they ever do find a way to get those thousands of radio stations on satellite radio, then you would have a valid concern.

As far as commercials on stations like A&E, MTV, etc. While there are similarities between satellite radio and cable TV, there are many differences. On Satellite Radio, the fee you pay gets you the ENTIRE radio programming on XM or Sirius. Satellite radio is subscriber driven, whereby cable TV is ratings and advertizing dollar driven. On Cable TV, the amount you pay depends on which stations you choose. And some stations (like A&E), while on cable, derive their revenue from advertizing as most get little if anything to be on cable TV.

What is driving viewers to satellite is not only the commercials, it's the annoying DJs that speak right up until the words of a song begins, the schtick of regular radio and also the same songs each day.

[hellonewman]

The biggest difference is with TV, there were only about a half dozen or so channels (maybe a dozen in the heavily populated areas) and cable TV is regionalized, satellite radio is nationalized and there are hundreds if not thousands of radio stations out there.

I'm a techno-ignoramus here, so help me out: Is satellite radio national by XM/Sirius' choice or is there no existing technology to customize programming to regional targets (i.e., offering a higher number of country/western channels in the Southeast)? If not, is there a chance such a technology could be developed?

As long as there is AM/FM out there, there is no way Satellite Radio can charge $13 a month AND put commercials on the music stations. No one would pay for it.

Well, as you said, the shift to satellite is being driven not only by commercials but by quality-of-programming issues, so I would counter that if the new (satellite) programming proves superior enough to terrestrial programming, people at a certain level of disposable income would, in fact, tolerate commercials in order to have access to the superior programming — especially if the volume of advertising remained at somewhat more tolerable levels than what you experience now on terrestrial. (I mean, if XM ever produced a couple of Mike&Mad Dog types who REALLY KNEW baseball and were really on top of the latest developments, hell, I'd pay $10 a month just for that.)

Plus, ad revenue would likely, before long, enable the satellite providers to lower subscription rates considerably, thus bringing more people "under the tent" and leaving out the relatively low percentage of listeners who still couldn't afford the subscription charge — and the sad fact is, advertisers don't care about them anyway.

Remember too that as the technology takes off, we may well see more providers than just Sirius and XM, and although they will each offer full and disparate slates of programming, they all will have different levels of subscribership. That's a form of "ratings" in itself, as surely as the comparison between how many people are watching MTV versus A&E versus ESPN at a given time.

I guess I'm just not as confident as you are that the subscription-based model is immune to morphing into an ad-ratings model, particularly if the product is good.




Edit: According to this article some of XM's music stations already have commercials, so it looks like it's starting already. Probably not a coincidence that they're the larger (and less expensive) of the 2 providers.

http://www.space.com/businesstechnol...ry_031112.html

[NelsonMuntz]

I'm a techno-ignoramus here, so help me out: Is satellite radio national by XM/Sirius' choice or is there no existing technology to customize programming to regional targets (i.e., offering a higher number of country/western channels in the Southeast)? If not, is there a chance such a technology could be developed?

Sirius already has six country stations running 24/7 nationwide. How much more country could you want

Even if the technology to customize programming by region exists or could be developed, it's somewhat counterintuitive to the medium. The value proposition of satellite radio is more choice.

[YankeePride1967]

I'm a techno-ignoramus here, so help me out: Is satellite radio national by XM/Sirius' choice or is there no existing technology to customize programming to regional targets (i.e., offering a higher number of country/western channels in the Southeast)? If not, is there a chance such a technology could be developed?

Well, as you said, the shift to satellite is being driven not only by commercials but by quality-of-programming issues, so I would counter that if the new (satellite) programming proves superior enough to terrestrial programming, people at a certain level of disposable income would, in fact, tolerate commercials in order to have access to the superior programming — especially if the volume of advertising remained at somewhat more tolerable levels than what you experience now on terrestrial. (I mean, if XM ever produced a couple of Mike&Mad Dog types who REALLY KNEW baseball and were really on top of the latest developments, hell, I'd pay $10 a month just for that.)

Plus, ad revenue would likely, before long, enable the satellite providers to lower subscription rates considerably, thus bringing more people "under the tent" and leaving out the relatively low percentage of listeners who still couldn't afford the subscription charge — and the sad fact is, advertisers don't care about them anyway.

Remember too that as the technology takes off, we may well see more providers than just Sirius and XM, and although they will each offer full and disparate slates of programming, they all will have different levels of subscribership. That's a form of "ratings" in itself, as surely as the comparison between how many people are watching MTV versus A&E versus ESPN at a given time.

I guess I'm just not as confident as you are that the subscription-based model is immune to morphing into an ad-ratings model, particularly if the product is good.




Edit: According to this article some of XM's music stations already have commercials, so it looks like it's starting already. Probably not a coincidence that they're the larger (and less expensive) of the 2 providers.

http://www.space.com/businesstechnol...ry_031112.html

The article is wrong, there are NO commercials on ANY of XM's music stations . And both XM and Sirius are equally priced, another inaccuracy in that article. There are commercials on channels like MSNBC, FOX News, CNN, ESPN, etc. as they are just playing the feed from the TV stations, but I have XM and there is not, nor will there ever be, commercials on the music stations. Again, how would XM or Sirius, even if they could regionalize, throw in hundreds of local radio stations in? You are confusing satellite radio with cable TV. There will always be AM/FM, no other way around it. Ad revenue is derived by ratings, there are no ratings on XM or Sirius, just subscribers! And also, why would XM or Satellite, who have a half dozen or more of just about any kind of music imagionable throw on their system another station not owned by XM or Sirius? It would make no sense. The biggest difference here is that in radio, Satellite and AM/FM are direct competitors like Burger King and McDonalds are, in TV, that isn't the case.

Note that as of 1/1/06, XM had just passed the 6 million subscriber market and Sirius was around 3.2-3.3 million subscribers. That is just over 9 million people with satellite radio. There are over 200 million that listen to AM/FM. I do expect the Satellite subscribers to grow, but there are too many AM/FM stations and too many people unwilling to pay to get satellite radio. Keep in mind one thing, radio is mostly for traveling, TV is for when you are at home. I do not expect satellite radio to ever be as big as cable TV for that reason.

Another reason why Satellite radio will never "co-opt" with regular radio. With cable TV, you can turn on A&E and see different programming than you will see on CBS or NBC. Why would XM/Sirius want to add a station playing the Beatles when they already have a station that plays the Beatles without commercials?

[RhodyYanksFan]

Howard is the man!! Join the Revolution on January 9th 2006 on Sirius Satelite radio...Channel 100...6am ET time

He was the man...in 1990. It's 2006. His time has come and gone. All he's done in the last 10 years is complain about the FCC and how the rules are keeping him from doing a great show. Meanwhile over that time, other shows have made names for themselves using the same rules. Howard cares about one thing...his paycheck and it'll show after a few months on Sirius.

[JDPNYY]

He was the man...in 1990. It's 2006. His time has come and gone. All he's done in the last 10 years is complain about the FCC and how the rules are keeping him from doing a great show. Meanwhile over that time, other shows have made names for themselves using the same rules. Howard cares about one thing...his paycheck and it'll show after a few months on Sirius.

...and the coolest thing is that now you won't be forced to listen to him as you go up and down the FM dial looking for a radio station that isn't running commercials.

It's a win/win situation for everyone.

[RhodyYanksFan]

...and the coolest thing is that now you won't be forced to listen to him as you go up and down the FM dial looking for a radio station that isn't running commercials.

It's a win/win situation for everyone.

Commercials? What are they? I have XM, the better satellite radio service.

[NYYBombshell]

I don't get all the hate for commercials. They are perfect bathroom/snack breaks.

[RhodyYanksFan]

I don't get all the hate for commercials. They are perfect bathroom/snack breaks.

Not when you're driving.

[Dooley Womack]

They added a new program to the all-Howard programming. Here's Sirius' description.

2am-4am - Emily Tit-talk. Celebrities and fans get to discuss Emily's body extensively. They will also have an open discussion on what they'd like/wouldn't like to do with her in explicit terms. All bodily functions will be explored and encouraged. Expect the same humiliation to come Emily's way as Howard's known to dish with other young women and father's daughters. Each Friday Emily will appear live in her bra and panties and sit on guest's and audience member's laps while answering very personal sexual questions. There's no telling what Emily will do or remove next!


Hey, if we can laugh and enjoy it when it happens to other young women and father's daughters why not with Howard's?

[KLJ]

They added a new program to the all-Howard programming. Here's Sirius' description.

2am-4am - Emily Tit-talk. Celebrities and fans get to discuss Emily's body extensively. They will also have an open discussion on what they'd like/wouldn't like to do with her in explicit terms. All bodily functions will be explored and encouraged. Expect the same humiliation to come Emily's way as Howard's known to dish with other young women and father's daughters. Each Friday Emily will appear live in her bra and panties and sit on guest's and audience member's laps while answering very personal sexual questions. There's no telling what Emily will do or remove next!

sounds like a great show to me..

[NelsonMuntz]

Howard is the man!! Join the Revolution on January 9th 2006 on Sirius Satelite radio...Channel 100...6am ET time

You got that right! I'm psyched for the show tomorrow.

[NelsonMuntz]

Commercials? What are they? I have XM, the better satellite radio service.

Better service? Based on what exactly?

[YankyDave]

Free FM. If you consider your time free, then I guess the endless commercials and the same 8 songs played each day is "free" then I guess it is.

You've obviously never listened to satellite radio. There's more repitition there because each channel is so specialized.

[YankeePride1967]

You've obviously never listened to satellite radio. There's more repitition there because each channel is so specialized.

You obviously don't know I am an XM Satellite subscriber and there is very little repetition, yes you may actually hear two Beatle songs on the 60's channel in a six hour period, but they will never be the same song. There is far less repetition on satellite radio, it's not even a debate. I have to listen to a boring adult contemporary station at work and every day they play the River of Dreams by Billy Joel, every freaking day.

[DiMaggio5CF]

... as you go up and down the FM dial looking for a radio station that isn't running commercials.

It's a win/win situation for everyone.

What's the point of this? Is the point that satelite radio is is better than FM? So it is. I won't debate that. Congratulations on having the money and the free time to get satelite radio.

But what does that have to do Howard Stern's hypocricy or lack thereof?

If being on a different network makes Stern more or less of a hypocrite, then I apologize for failing to see it. But if not, let's either drop the Satelite/FM talk or start a new thread on it, and instead discuss the topic at hand.

Satellite vs FM seems entirely pointless to me right now.