Yuku free message boards

Well, I guess that proves it. Fat, lazy, 40+ year old women, mostly 55-65 year old women, living in trailer parks have no interest in HD Radio.

Maybe you guys should do some homework before bloviating.

While fat, lazy and trailer park dwelling are the mental images I get when thinking of the average QVC viewer, they're not backed by hard demographic data. What is backed by demographic data is the age and gender of their viewers, and their biggest segment is 55 to 65 year old women - not exactly the biggest consumers of new technology.

Uhhh George, I just said fat, lazy and trailer park are the mental images I get when thinking about QVC viewers and they're not backed by demographic data. The age and gender of their audience is. The audience is old, and there are 3 women for every man watching.

Why do you think the vast majority of their programming is clothing and jewelry? Ding! Ding! Ding! Is a light coming on yet George? You probably wouldn't sell many HD Radios in the women's department at Macy's either.

Naah... We're talking about older trailer park residents here. I have to think Springer would be more popular with the younger toothless crowd. The yung'ens ain't watchun QVC.

Alright, now that I'm done "defending myself", I'll inject more relevant content.


Anyone remember that? That's directly from the Alliance's own press release! I wonder how much that "national radio advertising campaign" cost, other than in substituting "spots" for PSAs in place of unsold inventory. Production costs? A hundred markets? That's about one city per radio sold that night!


And we're looking forward to asking Ms. Campbell where that level of enthusiasm is now, as we still haven't heard about a possible follow-up presentation!


But there's one of the leaders, one of the kings of the Cartel, touting the benefits of QVC. Seems the chief disagrees (or at least, "disagreed") with the whole lazy, fat-women, trailer-park thing.

A quick search of this very HD Radio forum's posts, from just a few months ago, show some of the biggest HD-R supporters saying wonderful things about and in defense of QVC. Interesting.

I don't remember anyone saying "wonderful things" about QVC here. Maybe I had better things to do that day.

As for the Alliance, what would you expect them to say? I wouldn't expect them to trash QVC any more than I would expect them to trash Ford. Meaningless little press releases are part of the PR world. They're expected when a deal like this one is made.

I don't know who at the Alliance thought QVC would be a good outlet for HD Radios. Probably the same genius that came up with the "stations between the stations" campaign.

Since the topic was moved/shut down as I was crafting a response, this'll probably be my last. But here it is, as I'll RESPECTFULLY answer RadioMan100's questions:

See, that's the trouble. While I recognize there are some gentlemen here I disagree with regarding HD-R, it seems so many of the others find the seeming need to resort to attacks the postors and their stations/outlets when they run out of ammo to counter the ideas. I watched a few here go after WYSL as a station, for example, when they couldn't successfully argue with Bob Savage's ideas. I've seen others try to discredit broadcast veterans like Jerry Del Colliano and John Gorman, again, because they ran out of fuel trying to debate their views.

Now, you see not one, but two references to my "little Internet radio show".


Because just a couple of months ago, HD Cheerleaders across the land touted this QVC appearance as the Second Coming. The turning point. (Just like that non-event that was "the Ford deal".) The Alliance said it was going to do a "major marketing blitz" aimed specifically at getting folks to watch the program. We said it wouldn't matter. We certainly weren't alone. And, we were right. This was just some validation and an hour or so of crowing. As if you wouldn't have done the same had the QVC results been astronomical.


Which was it? The former. We were not trying to obfuscate, nor were we ignorant. There was never any need. The numbers speak very well for themselves. And the fact that we have the sources to unveil the numbers pretty much demonstrates a lack of ignorance with regard to QVC's demos, I think.


Actually, I was careful not to say you, RadioMan100, were among those praising QVC prior to the Fiasco. (Though I did, in disclosure, take a few minutes to check. See, I DO know how to "do my homework.) I hope you did indeed have better things to do. Apparently you don't today, and to be fair, neither do I.

Perhaps your comments about our "little Internet radio show" were meant to be insulting and/or demeaning. If so, those comments too were futile. The Racket IS indeed a "little Internet radio show". No dispute there; offense intended perhaps, but none taken. It's a "little Internet radio show" from Philadelphia that has more weekly listeners and advertisers than HD-1 and HD-2 stations have here, combined, according to ARB. Not bad for a "little Internet radio show" with no budget, compared with a major, multi-corporation force backed by hundreds of millions in advertising and promotions and a lapdog lobbyist group that's one of the most powerful on Capitol Hill. (Or was that too "by design"?)

I don't know who at the Alliance thought QVC would be a good outlet for HD Radios. Probably the same genius that came up with the "stations between the stations" campaign.

See, even we can find common ground here. I've conceded that there are few (a very few, but still some, nonetheless) HD-2 channels here and there that seem intriguing. (Fortunately all are already available for free online, eliminating my need to drop a few hundred bucks, but that's not the point.) But "stations between the stations" does absolutely nothing to convey the message to some that there IS more than the "Greatest Hits of the '80s, '90s, and Today".

Good debate today, and thanks for helping me keep my skills sharp. Too bad it was moved to obscurity (similar to when a company moves its terrestrial format to an HD-2 stream). Aside from one lone, worthless one-line post that appears to have been deleted (that was not from RadioMan100), I thought it was a good, productive thread. But it's not my forum. I've got to side with Roscoe on this one. There have been many, many more mean-spirited threads here that have survived for weeks without being killed. I thought a discussion like this one would be precisely what an "HD Radio" forum would be for.

I'm looking forward to continuing this discussion with RadioMan100 in a couple of years. Just imagine how much more interesting it'll be then.