Lords debate on DAB
![[Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e78927dafaee618c004668629d034893.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 27 Forum Member
✭
I found by accident while trawling my SKY channels at the weekend a recording of a Lords committee meeting which seemed to be debating DAB but I missed most of it. I wondered if anyone knew if the Government published a transcript and if so where I can find a link to it. It was the session with UTV, UKRD and Myers last Wednesday but the site is confusing to say the least.
Anyone help with this?
Anyone help with this?
0
Comments
Grant Goddard has published transcripts of some of the debates and added his own (biased) comments, not sure if this one was published
http://grantgoddardradioblog.blogspot.com/
This is the clause that scraps the 2010 auction of the three INR licences - particularly good news for Global, who own Classic FM.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00qpkvg/House_of_Lords_Digital_Economy/
Haven't had time to go through it but will do later.
Lord Howard of the Conservativies seemed to agree with the bill with the Lib Dems querying it, but end up withdrawing the ammendment!
Also how D1 can cover NI and local muxes can merge was discussed!
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Live.aspx
Transcripts of uncorrected oral evidence for the communications committee are at:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld/lduncorr.htm#com
Evidence that has been submitted in writing to the Communications Committee about Digital Switchover is on this page, scroll down:
http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/communications/wehlcommunications.cfm
How are Grant Goddard's comments biased? He doesn't represent a radio group.
That's the debate last night, not the evidence to the Communications Committee asked for by the OP with UTV, UKRD, Grant Goodard and John Myers, I've now worked out the direct link to that if you want to watch it rather than read the transcript:
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=5772
In the debate you mention Lord Eatwell, who declares an interest as the chair of the consumer panel of Classic FM, should do his research better. He asserts that "As at present conceived, analogue licences do not have a clear format specification." and goes on to state "If these national stations were to be auctioned in the near future, I would be willing to bet the noble Lord who is opposing that Clause 31 shall stand part of the Bill at least a bottle of claret that this licence would be secured by a pop music station, and that Classic FM would disappear."
However there is a caveat in the legislation, the licensee can operate any format of its choice, apart from pop music.
Transcript of the debate is at:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200910/ldhansrd/text/100208-0007.htm#10020816000111
So who gets the bottle of Claret?
And as someone who has posted on Guardian website makes clear they could have included DAB in any readvertised licence
My Bolding and correction of typo
In his latest blog he uses the latest listening figures to show DAB is ailing, however the graph shows it is down to The Hits and Smash Hits losing a lot of listeners, Smash Hits was removed from DAB a long time ago and The Hits is only on London DAB, however the Guardian did it's research better and said it's because The Hits and Smash Hits radio were removed from the Sky platform!
However the Sky platform is not failing, but it could be those listening on Sky might have moved to the equivelent The Hits (now 4music) and Smash Hits TV stations which are still there!
There always has been confusion in Rajar about if the The Hits and Smash Hits figures were for TV or radio and perhaps is now being corrected?
DAB has been steadily growing over the last few quarters, including the last quarter, perhaps slower than it should, and this was not shown in his blog! I agree what Lord Eatwell said was wrong.
However there is the risk if the auction does go ahead of classic music being replaced on the FM national network by say show music (which could edge on pop as Smooth is now doing), or even another talk station!
I do not have any connection with Global, but they seem to be lobbying if they keep Classic FM on FM with the current good terms, they will support all digital platforms (with DAB as primary platform) and promote a "drive to digital" on all their 10 (ish, maybe ex Arrow, but incl Choice and Chill) quasi national stations rather than just Classic FM on DAB.
There are few UK radio groups that can match this (except perhaps GMG and Bauer who seem to be both supporting Global).
Global seem to have won over the Lords and we may see a majority Labour government supporting a commercial radio group in the Commons for the first time!
I suspect Classic and maybe Galaxy will also finally appear on Freeview DTV radio along side Heart somehow!
We shall see if Global get what they want now, are still keen to move all it's stations, especially Heart, Galaxy and Classic, from FM to just digital platforms in 5 years time (along with the BBC, GMG and Bauer) if all the criteria is met!
The key words there are "for some reason", he doesn't represent a radio group or lobbying campaign.
He expresses an opinion. He backs it up largely by using statistical data, which interests me with my teaching background in the subject and general interest in radio.
That's not being biased, it's having a different opinion, the blog is open for comments, unlike some of Orlowski's Register articles, and you have made one. He may choose to respond.
Another radio group could also bid to run a classical music service, though they would have to change the station name presumably.
The appendix to the Digital Britain Bill did give a figure for the loss of revenue to the Treasury as the result of clause 31, it was several millions. There's also the point Grant Goddard made earlier that GWR, and now Global, have had the licence on very favourable financial terms as it was assumed when it was awarded that by now much more listening would be to digital.
I don't see why the taxpayer should be propping up a commercial business. It was GWR, not Global Radio, who made all the initial investment in Digital One and in R&D work to develop a sub £100 radio which kickstarted the platform. Are the current financial terms of the licence to be automatically extended as well?
You can argue that Global took on the accumulated debts in the company but their successful bid price took those into account and the shareholders baled out.
A commercial radio company that is believed to be largely funded by private Irish capital.
A Billboard correspondent gave some details of how the Bill can now progress.
"The House of Lords completed the committee stage on Feb. 8 and the first day of the report stage, where the Lords will go through line-by-line examination of the Bill, is scheduled for March 1....
Parliamentary procedure requires at least two weeks between the committee and report stages, so that ministers and officials can rewrite changes into the Bill. After it clears the House of Lords, the Bill could reach the House of Commons by March 15 - but ministers still have a tight schedule to pass it through the Commons before the Easter recess."
It has to go through 2 more stages in the Lords, then 5 in the Commons. There's a lot in the bill that's causing debate, a copyright and technology blog said that there are also 80 other bills competing for legislative time.
Julia Goldsworthy has said that she's concerned that the slow progress in the Lords will mean that the Government will attempt to accelerate progress of an unsatisfactory bill in the Commons. It's expected that Parliament will be dissolved in April, all amendments tabled by the opposition will slow progress.
What I believe the Government can, and may do is to take out the more contentious parts of the bill and just pass sections where there is little or no opposition to the general thrust of the proposals.
Guess another UK radio group could have started a rival Classic or Chill station on digital platforms, but have not (maybe Play, but have gone bust)! Global could have changed the format of Classic FM when they took it over, but did not! Global also supply 10 out of the 58 ish digital stations in London which no other commercial radio group have matched. Without strong UK radio groups, radio listening might stray to radio groups based overseas as the internet gets used more for streaming!
I do see your point about the lack of income back to the Government on the valuable FM network licence, but guess the DCMS also see the value in British companies like Silicon Frontier, Reciva, Pure, Radioscape, Mirics and Roberts (with partner Sangean) being on the cutting ege of Eureka 147 and internet radio technology and design.
Looks like some of the anti illegal internet download parts of the bill where ISPs will have to Police the net might be dropped for it to be passed in time.
I wouldn't describe a report on the increasing sales of internet radios in Norway and comparing that to DAB and a general post on DAB progress in the country as a rant. It's analysis based on statistics.
He includes plenty of quotes, including from World DMB and Government ministers.
I believe he has responded in the past to blog comments but no blogger is obliged to, you can just let everyone's comments, including your own, stand and let readers make their own judgements.
Not without permission from Ofcom which, if you are implying a significant format change, they'd have been unlikely to get, I doubt that they would have applied for it.
Why would they have wished to change the format of what was more than likely to be the most profitable part of the business given the favourable licensing terms under which Classic FM was operating?
Listeners chase content not "strong radio groups". That's to me the major point in Grant Goddard's piece. The content offered by the commercial radio groups hasn't been strong enough to attract sufficient listeners to digital only stations, even among those who have bought DAB radios.
Jazz FM has made me listen to DAB much more, it's been on since the end of Sounds of the Sixties, Planet Rock has also been successful in attracting listeners.
Neither of these are owned by "strong radio groups". However I don't know how the finances of the two stations are holding up.
And in the Norway blog he says, But does not back this up! If 729,000 radios were sold in Norway in 2009, this means 145,800 sets were internet sets which seems high, even including mobile handsets with internet radio capacity!
Guess in this have been trying to work out where the DCMS stands and guess they, with Ofcom, would rather back a radio group which is saying it will support the UK digital radio industry "drive to digital" with 10 quasi national stations and help generate income from technology exports, whereas the Treasury would probably prefer more income from an auction for the national analogue frequencies!
It's not a DAB blog. The fact DAB figures so heavily is because its such a big issue for UK radio.
The guy's a consultant. Presumably he has a blog to look smart, build confidence, and get work. Or else simply to let off steam.
I can't see how anyone can take a dispassionate look at DAB digital radio and conclude that it's worth the cost and effort.
(Cue people saying "yeah, but I like 6 Music" or whatever - fine - but do you like it enough to pay your share of the tens of millions of pounds UK DAB has cost? Remember it'll be a rather big share, given the small number of listeners!)
Cheers,
David.
Hours there have fallen from 8452 to 5823 which as you say is a significant drop. I haven't got the total figures, but if you look at his graph that by no means accounts for all of the decrease, it looks to have dropped from around 41000 to around 34000 weekly hours.
The blog is about listening to digital only radio stations, I think he's missed a word out in his second sentence.
He acknowledges your point in his blog entry:
"The jukebox music stations have suffered massive falls in listening, possibly a result of their ease of substitution by online offerings such as Spotify and Last.fm, and of owner Bauer’s policy to curb investment in digital radio broadcast platforms and content."
His point is that digital only content, particularly on DAB, isn't driving take up of the platform.
He doesn't say that, it's the second headline from an article in a Norwegian newspaper which he links to. Google translates it as:
We hear more radio online
Created by Atle Stava
Tuesday 09 February 2010
Every fifth radio sold is now an internet radio.
The figure does not apply to the whole year.
The second sentence of the blog summarises the article as stating that:
"During the final quarter of 2009, 22% of radios sold were internet radios, up from only 1% a year earlier"
I don't see the connection. The UK is only a "market leader" because, apart from Denmark, there is no other country in the world where digital radio has had anything approaching widespread consumer acceptance. Perhaps the strategy of building out DAB transmitter networks which offer little compelling digital only content hasn't worked and other countries will approach the situation differently.
I would argue that the UK isn't a market leader anyway.
Australia has sold about 100,000 DAB+ radios in the seven months it has been on-air, while Malta now has 10% take-up of DAB+ after just eighteen months.
I'm willing to bet that Goddard won't be featuring either of these countries on his blog in the near future - they don't conform to his theory that digital radio has been a commercial failure everywhere it has launched.
http://www.channelnews.com.au/Sound/Digital_Radio/K9Q6H5L2
http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=101413
Australia delayed their launch until there was both a range of stations, including some digital only ones, and receivers available and did a big marketing campaign. They are also using DAB+ which, if the multiplexes are full, reduces costs.
Coverage is also just the five capital cities.
Malta is also using DAB+ and I wouldn't have thought there will be coverage issues on a small island.
In both cases the business model seems more viable than the UK one.
I think you need to wait another year though to make a full judgement on consumer take-up, with most technologies a lot of initial sales are to early adopters who have a particular interest in what it's offering.
Grant in his blog changes this to a poorly researched and misleading! I have sent a comment, but it has not been published by Grant!
Seems with Malta and Australia British companies: Pure, Revo and Siicon Frontier will benefit from sets sold,
Not sure if Radioscape has been involved? but Swedish company Factum sold the coding and mux kit!
Guess part of the debates and proposed change is to help the UK Part Internet, part DTV, part current DAB and part FM (for small stations) digital radio business model seems more viable. But do agree however to reach this by 2015 will be hard work!
http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/publications/REDACTED_Ofcom_CBA_of_DRMigration_Final_Report.pdf
One interesting thing is that this report suggests that some of the Fm spectrum should/could be sold off. Wasn't aware that was on the table anymore.
Benefit arising from the value of the spectrum for other uses: £53m
So if that cash isn't available anymore then that can't be used to try and balance the other costs of migration or is that totally wrong?
The rest could be auctioned off like the recent L band auction.
Worldcom put in a low bid for the L band, but US company Qualcomm bid just over £8m and got it (maybe as a bargain!).
http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/15068/qualcomm-l-band-spectrum-plans-outlined
It is rumoured Qualcomm with maybe Sky will launch a US style MediaFlo Mobile TV service in time for the 2012 Olympics!
It does make the estimated figure of £53m for part of band 2 in maybe 2015 seem high, but band 2 needs less transmitters and penetrates houses better, so maybe mobile phone companies will be interested and will pay this figure. But if it is sold, like L band, the winner could do what they want within reason be it: mobile phones, DRM+ radio or new data services.
Not sure if they will be allowed national analogue FM radio, but presumably the radio groups will have a clause in the sale preventing this! Long before digital radio the BBC proposed 198 would be a parliamentary radio channel but were told to keep r4 on it.
The BBC inherited the Parliamentary TV channel from the cable industry and put it on freeview!
Having a radio version was an option when the BBC started 5 new stations, but decided on 1xtra, 6 music, r7, the Asian network and 5 sports extra. If the Asian network closes then maybe parliamentary radio is an option to replace it, but unlikely!
FM travels. That means any high powered uses need to be coordinated with the rest of Europe.
At (the hypothetical) "FM switch over", everyone in the country will still own an FM radio, and will have to use it to listen to local stations. Auction the spectrum off?! It'll be filled with pirate stations the very next day!
Cheers,
David.
Amazing - bringing all those extra digital stations to the people who currently don't receive them is worth £1.1bn. Who knew Premier Radio was so valuable?
The second page (PDF page 8) admits it's all nonsense - even on the positive assumptions, it takes until 2026 for the benefits to outweigh the costs. Who on earth thinks the media landscape will be otherwise unchanged by 2026 to let this happen?!
Equally silly, the predictions are fragile - if any one of them fails to materialise (and several could easily fail!) the whole thing falls down and costs dwarf benefits.
This report, in very measured consultants language, is basically saying "we've found one scenario where it might just work on paper, but in reality FFS don't do it!!!"
Cheers,
David.
Cheers,
David.