Would decalring bankruptcy protect iBiquity from the class-action suit?
DigitalRadioScams
"Consumer statutes and laws protect the purchasers of various products
such as HD car radios. A party may be legally liable for statements,
omissions or misrepresentations of material facts that should have
been know to be false or misleading and promoted the sale of the
product. Such laws protect innocent consumers from unlawful and
deceptive practices. The victims of questionable business practices by
parties such automobile manufacturers are the consumers who purchase
or lease cars with HD car radios at significantly increased costs when
these devices fail to function as they are represented to work. As
news develops and the investigation proceeds, Keefe Bartels, LLC will
carefully monitor events and research all relevant laws."
http://www.keefebartels.com/CM/Custom/HD-Car-Radio-Investigation.asp
"HD Radio Not High Definition"
"Despite iBiquity’s claims of improved sound quality and transmission,
there have been numerous complaints about HD Radio from not only the
radio industry but also consumers... Automakers are aware of the
complaints associated with HD Radio. For example, in 2007, BMW
released a Service Information Bulletin describing the problems
associated with HD Radio, but noted that there was no retrofit kit or
procedure available. The attorneys at Keefe Bartels are continuing
their investigation into HD Radio and whether consumers are being
forced to purchase technology that does not work as claimed. If you
have experienced problems with your factory-installed HD radio
receiver, we are interested in speaking to you."
http://www.keefebartels.com/CM/HotTopicsandAlerts/HotTopicsandAlerts168.asp
With receivers sales flat, HD conversions flat, no interest outside
the U.S. in HD (the Swiss just canned HD), and with this class-action
suit looming, would declaring bankruptcy protect iBiquity? Could this
law firm also go after Struble and al of his cohorts, separately? With
broadcasters getting involved over loss of revenue from IBLOCK, and
false promises by iBiquity, this investigation could escalate into
involving many other entities. Keefe Bartels has at least BMW by the
balls, because BMW had a TSB and Trouble-Shooting HD Radio Guide
starting back in 2007, yet continue to install standard HD Radio,
passing the costs onto unsuspecting customers, and has no resolution
to these problems.
RHF
wrote:
- "HD Car Radio Investigation"
.
.
IBOC - iBiquity Finally Under Investigation . . .
-ROTFL-
This Lawsuit Is Most Likely Going Nowhere
http://groups.google.com/group/ba.broadcast/msg/ffb5d6149534c9ae
.
Hello ! - Wake-Up FCC Expand The FM Radio Band
from 76 MHz to 88 MHz - Do It Now !
http://groups.google.com/group/ba.broadcast/msg/116e98129d42d730
.
.
> "Consumer statutes and laws protect the purchasers of various products
> such as HD car radios. A party may be legally liable for statements,
> omissions or misrepresentations of material facts that should have
> been know to be false or misleading and promoted the sale of the
> product. Such laws protect innocent consumers from unlawful and
> deceptive practices. The victims of questionable business practices by
> parties such automobile manufacturers are the consumers who purchase
> or lease cars with HD car radios at significantly increased costs when
> these devices fail to function as they are represented to work. As
> news develops and the investigation proceeds, Keefe Bartels, LLC will
> carefully monitor events and research all relevant laws."
>
> http://www.keefebartels.com/CM/Custom/HD-Car-Radio-Investigation.asp
>
> "HD Radio Not High Definition"
>
> "Despite iBiquity’s claims of improved sound quality and transmission,
> there have been numerous complaints about HD Radio from not only the
> radio industry but also consumers... Automakers are aware of the
> complaints associated with HD Radio. For example, in 2007, BMW
> released a Service Information Bulletin describing the problems
> associated with HD Radio, but noted that there was no retrofit kit or
> procedure available. The attorneys at Keefe Bartels are continuing
> their investigation into HD Radio and whether consumers are being
> forced to purchase technology that does not work as claimed. If you
> have experienced problems with your factory-installed HD radio
> receiver, we are interested in speaking to you."
>
Liron
this legal action?
Liron
"DigitalRadioScams" <digitalr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1f41b54f-832d-4a82...@d8g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
Joel Koltner
news:JUOgo.5584$FH2....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
> So, what is supposed to be wrong with HD Radio that is allegedly spurring
> this legal action?
The law firm will allege that iBiquity presented HD radio as a system that's
essentially a higher-fidelity version of the standard AM/FM radio experience,
and then proceed to demonstrate that in actuality that's not really the
case -- probably the biggest problem reported in the real world is that HD
"lock" tends to come and go as one is driving around, and the "blend to
analog" functionality in cases doesn't always work very well, making the
listen experience annoying enough that many people will just force the radio
into analog-only mode or switch to a different station.
It seems very unlikely the law firm could prevail, but when it comes to things
like, "does HD radio work the way it was advertised to consumers?," there's so
much subjectivity involved that it's anyone's guess. If the law firm can get
enough people to sign on, going after iBiquity might just start to look worth
the cost.
Personally, I'm betting the lawsuit will never proceed -- at best they'll be
able to shakedown iBiquity a bit for an out-of-court settlement wherein the
law firm makes millions and every HD radio owner gets a check for $5 or so.
I am disappointed that the FCC selected IBOC as the one and only AM/FM-band
digital radio format all the entire U.S. without even requiring that iBiquity
openly publish the complete on-air technical specification, much less trying
to stimulate greater competition for the best possible technical standard in
the first place. (IBOC uses some -- apparently minor -- variant of the AAC
CoDec, which is a good choice, but their their OFDM modulation scheme doesn't
seem to be as effective against multi-path interference as it really should
be.) Effectively the FCC handed iBiquity a printing press for greenbacks, and
even if that press can't run very fast, the FCC's actions still don't strike
me as having been in the best interest of the populace.
---Joel
dave
> "Liron" <nom...@sick.of.getting.spam> wrote in message
>
> It seems very unlikely the law firm could prevail, but when it comes to
> things like, "does HD radio work the way it was advertised to
> consumers?," there's so much subjectivity involved that it's anyone's
> guess. If the law firm can get enough people to sign on, going after
> iBiquity might just start to look worth the cost.
>
How 'bout you take the jury on a bus ride?
Joel Koltner
news:4c8fb905$0$5511$bd46...@news.dslextreme.com...
> How 'bout you take the jury on a bus ride?
Good strategy. :-)
RHF
.
DigitalRadioScams,
{Reply to another 'Free' Over-the-Air Radio SLAM}
.
IBOC : iBiquity and FCC Lawsuits :
A Conspiracy to Commit Legal Laughter !
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/830c0212c62b1cb7
.
IBOC - iBiquity Finally Under Investigation . . .
-ROTFL- This Lawsuit Is Most Likely Going Nowhere
http://groups.google.com/group/ba.broadcast/msg/ffb5d6149534c9ae
.
Hello ! - Wake-Up FCC Expand The FM Radio Band
from 76 MHz to 88 MHz - Do It Now !
http://groups.google.com/group/ba.broadcast/msg/116e98129d42d730
.
.
On Sep 14, 10:46 am, "Joel Koltner" <zapwireDASHgro...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
OK First -if- you are driving around in the same 'spot'
with an older Car/Truck with an older Analog Radio
and can NOT receive your favorite AM & FM Station
?WHY? Would you expect your new Car/Truck with a
new Digital [IBOC] AM & FM HD-Radio in that same
'spot' to be able to receive that same favorite AM &
FM Radio Station ? ? ?
HELLO - IT AIN'T THE AM & FM RADIOS be they
ANALOG OR DIGITAL or IBOC [.]
It's the Radio Station Transmiter's Signal and Location
and Your 'Distant' [or Hidden] Location On-the-Road.
it' don't take a rocket scientist - rotfl ~ RHF
.
.
SMS
\
> It's the Radio Station Transmiter's Signal and Location
> and Your 'Distant' [or Hidden] Location On-the-Road.
>
> it' don't take a rocket scientist - rotfl ~ RHF
A personal injury law firm isn't really interested in the technology or
the root cause of a problem. Nor are they interested in a trial. They
want a settlement.
Still this a really strange "investigation." There are so many actually
valid technology issues that they could be investigating where they
could have a chance of a successful class action lawsuit, i.e. why has
one cellular carrier drastically reduced coverage after signing up
millions of consumers to two year contracts? This carrier has been
quietly waiving early termination fees to its customers that make a fuss
about what happened, but they have never publicized what they did to
their coverage or what they will do for customers that complain.
Meanwhile HD Radio plods along, adding stations, adding advertisers on
the sub-channels, and doubling receiver sales every year.
iBiquity is right on target when it states:
“Let’s be very clear on streaming, it’s not going to kill radio.
Pandora is not the Death Star that’s going to destroy the business, but
it isn’t going to save it either. Streaming is, for a lot of different
reasons, a good increment to the business. It serves as revenue. But
the ability to replace radio’s traditional over-the-air revenue with new
streaming revenue does not exist. It just doesn’t work.”
“The basic radio infrastructure where one tower covers an infinite
number of listeners is a lot more efficient way to deliver audio than a
point-to-point connection that you need with the Internet. People are
starting to get that. We’re seeing not only the capacity issues but
also starting to see variable pricing plans.”
ron felder
"Joel Koltner" <zapwireD...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fyOjo.126002$Qg.5...@en-nntp-04.dc1.easynews.com...
maybe it'll go the way of am stereo
DigitalRadioScams
> So, what is supposed to be wrong with HD Radio that is allegedly spurring
> this legal action?
>
> Liron
>
>
> With receivers sales flat, HD conversions flat, no interest outside
> the U.S. in HD (the Swiss just canned HD), and with this class-action
> suit looming, would declaring bankruptcy protect iBiquity? Could this
> law firm also go after Struble and al of his cohorts, separately? With
> broadcasters getting involved over loss of revenue from IBLOCK, and
> false promises by iBiquity, this investigation could escalate into
> involving many other entities. Keefe Bartels has at least BMW by the
> balls, because BMW had a TSB and Trouble-Shooting HD Radio Guide
> starting back in 2007, yet continue to install standard HD Radio,
> passing the costs onto unsuspecting customers, and has no resolution
> to these problems.
I do have a bit of inside-scoop on what is going on. Some broadcasters
are being call as witnesses, and this is going to escalate. Keefe has
at leaset BMW and Volvo by the throat with their HD Radio TSBs and HD
Radio Trouble-Shooting Guides, by forcing consumers to pay extra for
technology that doesn't work. Keefe is getting A LOT of complaints
from consumers. The investigation is still in its early stages.
DigitalRadioScams
These are the typea of misleading claims that are going to land
Struble in court, and civil fraud on Struble's level could escalate
into crimnal fraud.
Joel Koltner
news:i76c1i$p59$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> maybe it'll go the way of am stereo
Indeed, this is a pretty likely outcome.
The difference this time around, I suppose, is that the guys behind the
standard -- iBiquity -- have a lot of money at stake (they receive royalties
on every single transmitter and receiver sold, as well as a cut of advertising
revenue from HD broadcasts), so they're pushing hard to keep the format
alive -- even going so far as to subsidize the radio manufacturers who agree
to include HD receives in their products.
Interestingly, while AM stereo is about 99.99% dead in the U.S., in other
countries I've read it's only, oh, say, 90% dead. ...although apparently this
is mainly in countries that are too poor to purchase DAB transmitters.
---Joel
Joel Koltner
news:f6bec60a-c229-4596...@p24g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
> OMG Another "DigitalRadioScams" Radio Slam !
Yeah, I know the guy behind it is so anti-iBiquity/HD radio that he's not very
objective, but that doesn't mean he doesn't still make some good points.
>?WHY? Would you expect your new Car/Truck with a
>new Digital [IBOC] AM & FM HD-Radio in that same
>'spot' to be able to receive that same favorite AM &
>FM Radio Station ? ? ?
Well, that's where you have to start looking very closely at the advertising
that was used. While IANAL, I doubt one would have much difficulty finding
consumers who felt that the actual performance of HD radio was pretty far from
what was advertised to them.
> It's the Radio Station Transmiter's Signal and Location
> and Your 'Distant' [or Hidden] Location On-the-Road.
It's also the modulation format chosen (OFDM) as well as the coding used
(i.e., how much error correction/redundancy was applied).
---Joel
Joel Koltner
news:4c90f3ba$0$1611$742e...@news.sonic.net...
> Still this a really strange "investigation." There are so many actually
> valid technology issues that they could be investigating where they could
> have a chance of a successful class action lawsuit, i.e. why has one
> cellular carrier drastically reduced coverage after signing up millions of
> consumers to two year contracts? This carrier has been quietly waiving early
> termination fees to its customers that make a fuss about what happened, but
> they have never publicized what they did to their coverage or what they will
> do for customers that complain.
Agreed, it does seem like there'd be bigger fish to fry. Maybe one of the law
firm's principals bought a BMW and really took it personally when his HD radio
didn't work? :-)
> Meanwhile HD Radio plods along, adding stations, adding advertisers on the
> sub-channels, and doubling receiver sales every year.
Yes, although one has to keep in mind that a lot of that growth isn't entirely
organic -- last I heard, iBiquity was still subsidizing some of the
manufacturers who agreed to put HD receivers into their radio. There's
nothing inherently wrong with this, but it's important to know for anyone
investing in iBiquity who's trying to decide just how strong a performer
they'll be long-term (since sooner or later the seed money runs out!).
> “Let’s be very clear on streaming, it’s not going to kill radio. Pandora is
> not the Death Star that’s going to destroy the business, but it isn’t going
> to save it either. Streaming is, for a lot of different reasons, a good
> increment to the business. It serves as revenue. But the ability to replace
> radio’s traditional over-the-air revenue with new streaming revenue does not
> exist. It just doesn’t work.”
This is all true.
> “The basic radio infrastructure where one tower covers an infinite number of
> listeners is a lot more efficient way to deliver audio than a point-to-point
> connection that you need with the Internet. People are starting to get that.
> We’re seeing not only the capacity issues but also starting to see variable
> pricing plans.”
Also a good point, but while one tower can cover a
[very-large-if-not-infinite] number of listeners, as technology advances, at
some point wireless bandwidth is "cheap enough" that it no longer matters --
it'll become profitable to stream to people individually. That crossover
point is, in my opinion, still a ways off though -- around a decade away, and
likely double that.
---Joel
Joel Koltner
>These are the typea of misleading claims that are going to land
>Struble in court, and civil fraud on Struble's level could escalate
>into crimnal fraud.
I bet he's had his lawyers review them carefully. :-)
He's talking in pretty general terms, though, so I doubt you could nail him on
those particular statements.
---Joel
SMS
> "SMS" <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote in message
> news:4c90f3ba$0$1611$742e...@news.sonic.net...
>> Still this a really strange "investigation." There are so many
>> actually valid technology issues that they could be investigating
>> where they could have a chance of a successful class action lawsuit,
>> i.e. why has one cellular carrier drastically reduced coverage after
>> signing up millions of consumers to two year contracts? This carrier
>> has been quietly waiving early termination fees to its customers that
>> make a fuss about what happened, but they have never publicized what
>> they did to their coverage or what they will do for customers that
>> complain.
>
> Agreed, it does seem like there'd be bigger fish to fry. Maybe one of
> the law firm's principals bought a BMW and really took it personally
> when his HD radio didn't work? :-)
There is no lawsuit. There is not going to be any class action lawsuit.
This is a law firm trying to see if there is any money to be made in a
settlement. There isn't. No one takes them seriously. Not iBiquity. Not
BMW. No one. Well perhaps are favorite anti-HD troll takes them seriously.
Perhaps people think that HD Radio should work like satellite radio
rather than traditional terrestrial radio and are disappointed at the
programming they have available in their area, or perhaps they're in an
area where the HD choices are limited. They are simply misinformed,
which is not grounds for any lawsuit.
>> Meanwhile HD Radio plods along, adding stations, adding advertisers on
>> the sub-channels, and doubling receiver sales every year.
>
> Yes, although one has to keep in mind that a lot of that growth isn't
> entirely organic -- last I heard, iBiquity was still subsidizing some of
> the manufacturers who agreed to put HD receivers into their radio.
Perhaps, but no different than satellite radio, actually satellite radio
is paying even more per new subscriber because of revenue sharing.
> There's nothing inherently wrong with this, but it's important to know
> for anyone investing in iBiquity who's trying to decide just how strong
> a performer they'll be long-term (since sooner or later the seed money
> runs out!).
No individual can invest in iBiquity as they are not a public company.
Nor did the investors (mainly large station owners) expect any return
beyond the deployment of the HD system. It's likely that iBiquity will
eventually become part of a larger technology licensing company.
> Also a good point, but while one tower can cover a
> [very-large-if-not-infinite] number of listeners, as technology
> advances, at some point wireless bandwidth is "cheap enough" that it no
> longer matters -- it'll become profitable to stream to people
> individually. That crossover point is, in my opinion, still a ways off
> though -- around a decade away, and likely double that.
We're moving the wrong way on that front. No evidence that 4G is going
to solve it either.
DigitalRadioScams
> On 9/20/2010 5:35 PM, Joel Koltner wrote:
>
Yup, keep yourself in denial - LOL!
Joel Koltner
> There is no lawsuit. There is not going to be any class action lawsuit. This
> is a law firm trying to see if there is any money to be made in a
> settlement. There isn't. No one takes them seriously. Not iBiquity. Not BMW.
> No one. Well perhaps are favorite anti-HD troll takes them seriously.
You're probably right about all this, although it'll still be interesting to
see if it goes anywhere at all or just immediately fizzles here.
> No individual can invest in iBiquity as they are not a public company.
Ah, good point -- I had forgotten that.
I suppose then it only matters for, e.g., a radio station owner you're trying
to decide whether or not it's worth the $$$ to purchase HD radio transmitters
and start paying iBiquity royalties for using them.
> Nor did the investors (mainly large station owners) expect any return beyond
> the deployment of the HD system. It's likely that iBiquity will eventually
> become part of a larger technology licensing company.
They might become another Rambus then? -- HD radio itself will tend to go
away, but iBiquity will stick around, taking in royalties eternally? :-)
> We're moving the wrong way on that front. No evidence that 4G is going to
> solve it either.
Agreed, it'll be awhile.
---Joel
SMS
> "SMS" <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote in message
> news:4c981133$0$1636$742e...@news.sonic.net...
>> There is no lawsuit. There is not going to be any class action
>> lawsuit. This is a law firm trying to see if there is any money to be
>> made in a settlement. There isn't. No one takes them seriously. Not
>> iBiquity. Not BMW. No one. Well perhaps are favorite anti-HD troll
>> takes them seriously.
>
> You're probably right about all this, although it'll still be
> interesting to see if it goes anywhere at all or just immediately
> fizzles here.
A successful class action lawsuit requires thousands, or tens of
thousands members of the class. You don't have that here. The law firm
floated a trial balloon, but they were probably misled by our favorite
troll.
>> No individual can invest in iBiquity as they are not a public company.
>
> Ah, good point -- I had forgotten that.
>
> I suppose then it only matters for, e.g., a radio station owner you're
> trying to decide whether or not it's worth the $$$ to purchase HD radio
> transmitters and start paying iBiquity royalties for using them.
The royalties are not large, and were recently reduced even more. The
transmitters are a one-time expense, though of course they cost money to
operate in terms of electricity. It's actually a testament to the
foresight of station owners that so many were willing to move to HD even
before the number of receivers that were deployed justified it. But a
lot of the stations that added HD are the bigger and highly profitable
stations, for which the cost of HD is really lost in the noise of their
operating budgets. It's the smaller, lower power, local stations that
now need to move to HD.
>> Nor did the investors (mainly large station owners) expect any return
>> beyond the deployment of the HD system. It's likely that iBiquity will
>> eventually become part of a larger technology licensing company.
>
> They might become another Rambus then? -- HD radio itself will tend to
> go away, but iBiquity will stick around, taking in royalties eternally? :-)
Precisely. Rambus is who I was thinking of too. iBiquity right now is
mostly doing marketing, and the need for that will eventually end as HD
Radio becomes mainstream. After that you just need an organization to
manage the royalties.
>> We're moving the wrong way on that front. No evidence that 4G is going
>> to solve it either.
>
> Agreed, it'll be awhile.
It's more likely that people will just continue what they're doing
now--plugging in their iPod with locally stored music into their
vehicle, or storing the music on a local hard disk in the car, or on USB
sticks or SD cards. Wireless data coverage is fine when you're in a
city, but doesn't work once you're out of urban areas. This summer we
listened to a 42 CD book (Pillars of the Earth) while driving across
Nevada, Utah, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, South Dakota, Wyoming, Montana,
Idaho, Oregon, and California, out of touch with 2G or 3G wireless
service for most of the trip. The 42 CDs were stored (along with about
25 more books) on a USB stick that plugged into my receiver. The kids
had their music players and DSi and DVD player.