HD Radio is going to take a while to accept because of that Catch 22: consumers will only pay so much for a receiver to get the content, while manufacturers will only lower prices to increase availability once it’s proven consumers will pay to buy receivers for the content.
Marketing HD Radio for its fidelity is a problem for mobile entertainment since you can’t tell the difference between HD Radio and FM broadcast, which is why the better tack would be to market the variety of programming available on the multicast channels. There’s a lot of alternate music formats on HD2, some of them commercial free. If the programming is unique enough, consumers will overcome their resistance to high prices to get an HD Radio.
Go figure: thousands of people are unwilling to shell out $200 for a new HD radio, yet are willing to fork over $15/mo for a satellite radio subscription. It will come down to content.
At this point, it’s because the hardware (ie HD Receiver) is too expensive. Yes, there is programming there but how many people are actually listening? This is terrestrial radio’s answer to satellite radio in my opinion.
3 Responses on why hasn’t hd radio been more successful?
It is too expensive, and the quality isn’t THAT much better when you’re driving around in a car.
HD Radio is going to take a while to accept because of that Catch 22: consumers will only pay so much for a receiver to get the content, while manufacturers will only lower prices to increase availability once it’s proven consumers will pay to buy receivers for the content.
Marketing HD Radio for its fidelity is a problem for mobile entertainment since you can’t tell the difference between HD Radio and FM broadcast, which is why the better tack would be to market the variety of programming available on the multicast channels. There’s a lot of alternate music formats on HD2, some of them commercial free. If the programming is unique enough, consumers will overcome their resistance to high prices to get an HD Radio.
Go figure: thousands of people are unwilling to shell out $200 for a new HD radio, yet are willing to fork over $15/mo for a satellite radio subscription. It will come down to content.
At this point, it’s because the hardware (ie HD Receiver) is too expensive. Yes, there is programming there but how many people are actually listening? This is terrestrial radio’s answer to satellite radio in my opinion.
RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI